User talk:Sesshomaru/Archive 15

Abtract and RfAr
Thanks for your message; nothing particularly new with Abtract - Collectonian is still feeling harassed by him editing near to her recent contributions, I am not getting any further with determining a form of words that would address her concerns without impinging on Abtract's views on how he can be permitted to edit the encyclopedia, and Abtract is in any event questioning that I should even be attempting to do so owing to my supposed antipathy toward him... So I took it to the final resort for dispute resolution.

If you are not particularly interested in supporting or opposing the Request to have a case, if it is accepted I think it might be worthwhile for you to note that you and Abtract have been able to agree some sort of protocol to avoid conflict - it may help the Committee when deciding how best to handle matters if it can be shown that agreements between Abtract and others can work. However, that is still in the realms of if - and if you are not interested at present (or in future) in participating then that it fine; we are all volunteers here. I will let you know should the case be accepted, and you can decide then if you wish to play any part of it. Cheers LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:16, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Urgent!
The Hulk P&A article up for deletion. Your vote is required: Dave (talk) 12:44, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Abtract-Collectonian
An Arbitration case involving you 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/Abtract-Collectonian/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/Abtract-Collectonian/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 12:09, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sess, I would note that the ArbCom has accepted the case under the above title - whereas you were named in my Request. This doesn't really effect you, and you can add whatever information you wish (or not, as you decide). I shall be noting your previous interactions with Abtract (both positive and negative) and Collectonian in my Evidence and workshop proposals, and if you are not taking an active part I will show you the diffs in case I make any mistakes in regard to yourself. Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:53, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Hndis's edits
Hello, you contacted me about two weeks ago asking me not to edit any more dabs until I had explained myself on a thread you had initiated, which I have done. I have not received any response from you on the thread, however, and I would appreciate it if you took the time to reply. Boleyn2 (talk) 14:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC) (I changed my username last week)

Temporary injunction in Abtract-Collectonian
The parties are directed to continue to comply with the existing editing restrictions detailed here until this case is resolved or until further direction of the Arbitration Committee. In the event of any disagreement concerning the scope of the restrictions, the parties should err on the side of caution and avoid any arguable violations. The parties are urged to present their evidence in this case as soon as possible and to indicate when they have finished, so that the committee can reach a prompt final decision which will supersede this temporary injunction. Nothing in this temporary injunction constitutes a ruling on the merits of the case or reflects any prejudgment that all, some, or none of the temporary restrictions will be included in the final decision.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tznkai (talk) 21:58, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Doctor (comics)
OK I put it back - seems they have misunderstood what a SIA is.

You might to have a look at The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. I suspect it should really redirect to [The Texas Chain Saw Massacre]] with the disambiguation page being properly defined. I could be possible in the longer run to expand it into a "Texas Chain Saw Massacre franchise" article but that is perhaps for another day. (Emperor (talk) 03:29, 18 October 2008 (UTC))

Section length, Book titles, et al.
Hi. Can you read this section and then offer your opinion on the points raised? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 14:11, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but I really don't want to get involved. I just clean up that [Living Laser] article every now and then to conform with Wikipedia guidelines. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

needs a little revamping
Re: Kiss (disambiguation) and your edit summary (needs a little revamping), you wouldn't care to be a little more specific, would you? Pdfpdf (talk) 11:31, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I thought I had a feeling of deja vu ... Pdfpdf (talk) 11:37, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Tupac Shakur
I know nothing of Tupac Shakur, but with regard to I point out that google suggests that LPC may have been his birth name. I don't know if thats at all reliable, though William M. Connolley (talk) 22:19, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a matter of debate. This section, in Shakur's article, explains it best. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:24, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * So it does. OK, fine by me William M. Connolley (talk) 22:32, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Eponymous
This is the word you seek on another's talk page as in "eponymous character". Abtract (talk) 22:29, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe. Let's see what she thinks. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:32, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Hatnote advice
I have just had a quick run at Wanted (comics) and removed one hatnote (to Wanted) but am unsure about the other one. If it occupied the top slot (like A History of Violence or from the other direction Road to Perdition) I could see a hatnote might be useful as people looking for the film may not even know it is based on a comic (Hell I'm often surprised, like Bulletproof Monk, which still doesn't have an article on the comics) and may need a quick pointed on to the film but people turning up at the comic page will usually know what they are getting and if they want the film there is a link in the menu to the section that already links to the film. Thoughts? (Emperor (talk) 16:00, 22 October 2008 (UTC))


 * Thanks - that was my general feeling about the issue and I've now removed the hatnote. (Emperor (talk) 15:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC))

Might as well throw you another one: Dick Grayson. Both the names are linked in (in bold) in the lead and it seems unnecessary. (Emperor (talk) 16:51, 23 October 2008 (UTC))

And while I'm on a roll I often see things like this: The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Where the links are given in the article. As in my first comment I could see an argument being made for including the film link but the characters one seems unnecessary. (Emperor (talk) 17:30, 23 October 2008 (UTC))

AKR619
This editor seems to be undoing all of your edits to various categories. I understand why you made them in the first place, but perhaps it would be best to leave clearer edit summaries from now on. Again, had I not realized what you were doing, I would have reverted you myself. Regards, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:47, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notice. I'll look into it. - jc37 10:09, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Third Party
FYI - these will show when the whole "third party" claim was shot down:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Melter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ego_the_Living_Planet

Asgardian (talk) 05:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, got it ;) Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem! I'll also do a search for you on the whole lead thingamajig. Asgardian (talk) 05:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Found it! This is one of the old discussions on fiction. Promise no. 2 kept!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Comics/Archive_32#Fictional_wordplay

Regards Asgardian (talk) 04:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Restrictions on editing of articles between Abtract, Collectonian and Sesshomaru
By agreement of a majority of the involved administrators, the restrictions here have been amended in the following way, and come into effect at the conclusion of this arbitration case:

Important Notice These restrictions are imposed upon the above named editors, and are not subject to further amendment without agreement of a majority of the "involved administrators".


 * Matters between and  shall be handled according to the restrictions/remedies enacted by the Arbitration Committee.
 * and are banned from interacting with, or, directly or indirectly, commenting on each other on any page in Wikipedia. Should either account violate their bans, they may be blocked for up to one week. After the fifth such violation, the maximum block length shall be increased to one month. This restriction may only be enforced if violations are reported directly by either Abtract or Sesshomaru - it does not apply if violations are reported by any other editor(s).
 * Further remedies concerning Abtract, Collectonian and/or Sesshomaru may be enacted to include banning interactions with any other user, if it is later deemed necessary in the opinion of 3 administrators to prevent harassment.
 * The editors are already aware of the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle, and are reminded that edit-warring has a disruptive and detrimental effect on Wikipedia. Should any of these 3 users edit-war in the future, they may be subject to further sanctions (including wider revert limitations, blocks and bans).

Involved administrators are, , and who should act with due notice to all the other parties. Other admins are welcome to add their names to the above, and comments by any other party is welcome.

+ + + + +

To whom it may concern, the above was discussed and agreed upon here by a majority of the involved administrators. Ncmvocalist (talk) 17:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Powers and Abilities of the Hulk merger into the main page
There is a discussion about the merging of "Powers and Abilities of the Hulk" into the main page. I'd appreciate if you'd like to chip in. I'm extremely short on time and energy nowadays. Thanks in advance. Dave (talk) 18:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Accurate Info
Curious if you removed accurate info from the Mark Wahlberg page?

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/obituaries/death_notices/view.bg?articleid=1073799

Donald E. Wahlberg Dorchester, Mass Monday, February 18, 2008

E-mail Printable (0) Comments Text size Share (0) Rate Donald E. in Dorchester, February 14, 2008. Former husband of Alma E. (Donnelly) Wahlberg of Weymouth. Loving father of Michelle Donnelly of FL, Arthur E. Donnelly of Weymouth, Paul J. Wahlberg of Hingham, James M. Wahlberg of FL, Tracey A. Marcarelli of Holbrook, Robert G. Wahlberg of Dorchester, Donald E. Wahlberg and Mark R. Wahlberg, both of CA, Donna Nelson of Rockland,Scott Wahlberg of Holbrook, and the late Deborah E. Donnelly and Buddy Wahlberg. Brother of Robert Wahlberg of CA, Archie Wahlberg of Quincy, Alfred Wahlberg of NC, Donna Black of Quincy, and the late Thelma Moser, Joe and Paul Wahlberg. Survived by 17 grandchildren, 4 great-grandchildren, and many nieces and nephews. Visiting hours in the Murphy Funeral Home, 1020 Dorchester Ave., DORCHESTER, Monday 4:00 P.M. 8:00 P.M. Funeral Mass in St. Margaret Church of Blessed Mother Teresa Parish, Tuesday morning, February 19, at 10:00 A.M. Relatives and friends invited. Veteran Korean War- U.S. Army. Late member of the Teamsters Local #25. In lieu of flowers, donations in his memory may be made to Marian Manor Nursing Home, 130 Dorchester St., South Boston, MA 02127. Interment in Cedar Grove Cemetery, Dorchester. For directions and guestbook, www.jmurphyfh.com. Funeral Home handicapped accessible with ample parking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.47.68 (talk) 13:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Abtract-Collectonian
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. shall not interact with, or comment in any way (directly or indirectly) about, Collectonian, on any page in Wikipedia; harass or wikistalk Collectonian such as by editing pages that Collectonian has recently edited; or make uncivil comments about or personal attacks upon any user.

These restrictions imposed upon Abtract shall be interpreted in a reasonable fashion so as to allow Abtract to continue with appropriate editing while preventing any further harassment of Collectonian. Any attempts to "game the system" or "wikilawyer" the details of the restrictions are unwelcome. Should Abtract violate the restrictions imposed upon him, he may be blocked for an appropriate period of time by any uninvolved administrator, with any blocks to be logged here. Collectonian is urged to continue to avoid any unnecessary interaction with Abtract.

Furthermore, please note that the temporary injunction enacted by the Committee on October 16 in relation to this case now ceases to be in effect.

For the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 13:24, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

DAB Linking discussion
"If we do it that way, then editors will have to do XYZ, which I don't think we want to do?" is less confrontational than (paraphrasing your edit) "So you, ABC, want us to do XYZ." The second CAN be construed as "So you, ABC, are stupid enough to want us to do XYZ," when they might not have seen the implications of the proposal. The first is not so easily misunderstood that way. I don't think you are guilty of a personal attack, but I think you were "racheting up the rhetoric" in a way that - in its interpretation - added extra static to the discussion that was unnecessary. (John User:Jwy talk) 18:57, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Overlinking
Hi. I saw that you reverted here, which is great. The user who did that has spent a lot of time going around and linking locations, etc., in infoboxes. All the edit summaries referencing a location have been linking. He was approached about it yesterday and indicated that "Country overlinking on infoboxes has been suspended indefinitely." I am not aware of that. I've reverted some of them, but he persists and I'm not well versed enough in the particular guidelines to approach him on it. Do you have any idea where it is indicated that it was suspended? Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:08, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * There was a consensus somewhere, but not sure where it took place exactly. I noticed Londo06's edits, but chose not to do anything about it until I looked through my watchlist. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:13, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Masking links
Yes I think the main link should always be unmasked. The problem there is that the link is a redirect and the name is poor but doesn't really matter that much. I'll have a dig around and come up with a better name for the link like "Frankenstein (Howling Commandos)" or something. I'd probably also want to source it as there isn't much information on the character. (Emperor (talk) 14:56, 1 November 2008 (UTC))

Maybe you can help
I've heard about you. You can maybe help me. I was blocked unfairly (the warnings didn't match up with the block reason all the way). I've tried doing the unblock request, but the people won't listen to me. Can you help. See this and this for information. --WeezleBeezle --16:01, 1 November 2008 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.78.194 (talk)
 * Not sure what I can do to help. I'm not an administrator, so there's really nothing I might accomplish. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:45, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, you still seem reasonable, even if you're not an admin. Maybe you can ask someone for me, and you can be like a lawyer.  By the way, did you look at my links?  --64.107.78.194 (talk) 21:11, 3 November 2008 (UTC) WeezleBeezle
 * Yes, but I haven't the time to look into it now. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:46, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Universe of The Legend of Zelda
Please add your input on the debate at this page. I'm willing to abide by whatever decision you and other editors come to. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 00:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Dragon Ball: Yo! Son Goku and His Friends Return!!‎
There's a heated discussion at Talk:Dragon Ball: Yo! Son Goku and His Friends Return!!‎. I was wonder if you could give your thoughts on this subject? Sarujo (talk) 00:56, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe, I'll look into it if I have the oppotunity. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:46, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Category:Fictional characters with superhuman strength
Per the cat's description, shouldn't we start removing characters that are erroneously placed here? Like Iron Man and Master Chief? Please reply on your talk page, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:56, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, please. Per long precedent, use of an item/object/etc. does not qualify as an "inherent" ability.
 * As well as several which need "diffusion" (subcatting) to the subcats.
 * Also keep an eye out for omnipotent or "divine" beings (as well as beings who use magic). Since they have potentially any ability, it's a hindrance to navigation to include them. - jc37 13:12, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Pixie (X-Men)
Jc37, why didn't you remove the flight category from this article? Please reply on your talk page, which I've watchlisted. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:17, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Why didn't I? Because the character has wings, and so (I presume) flies due to those rather than the use of magic. - jc37 02:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Right, but how can you be sure that that's the case? For instance, doesn't Tinker Bell fly because of "fairy magic" and not wings? And regarding the edit you made to Majin Buu, I think he should remain in the flight category since the article says he uses chi to fly. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:22, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If the character has wings, I'm not going to worry about it atm. If you find some verifiable reliable sources stating that the character can't use their wings to fly (similar to a penguin), then feel free.
 * As for the other character, feel free to re-add the fly cat for now. (ki/chi is, I suppose, as close to tk as to magic.)
 * And thank you for more examples of why the fly cat is problematic. - jc37 02:28, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, the most "problematic" thing about it IMO is that it hasn't been broken down into different wordings like I proposed at the cfd. And while I may not have a source for that Tinker Bell statement, do you think characters like Prince Namor, Sephiroth, Seras and the legendary Hermes should be categorized as fliers? I don't see how we're supposed to treat these guys seriously, given that their illogical flight-capable abilities (ie, little wings or one giant wing) make less sense than that of someone with magic powers. What are your thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:02, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * What we may "think" isn't as important as what we can source.
 * As for my recollection of fiction or lengendary myths, I seem to recall that there have been various, at times conflicting, answers to your questions. Everything from "the wings do do it, to they glide on the air currents, and the wings provide directional assistance (like the tail of a helicopter), to the wings are magical, and by that magic they provide flight. In the case of Hermes, he's a deity, so it doesn't matter.
 * And these sorts of issues are why lists would be better helps, so that each explanation can be noted and sourced in the text.
 * And an article on the hidtory of superhuman flight would be, I think, an interesting article. Describing how Superman (for example) went from the jump of a grasshopper to actual flight. And how now the trend is from flight to teleportation/dimension-hopping. (The influence of several things, including Star Trek.) But of course, sources would be required, to keep it from being an essay of WP:OR : ) - jc37 16:52, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * (de-dent) - By the way, Majin_Buu is a "demon" so there is no point in categorising the character in any ability-related categories, since the character can potentially duplicate any ability. This would seem to be true of most cosmic, divine, angelic, and demonic characters/creatures. - jc37 19:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Huh? But Majin Buu's method of flying is chi energy, not wings. Unless, are you suggesting that Category:Fictional demons is a subcat of something like that? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:08, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't care if it has an aircraft propeller. As a "divine" creature (a demon), it has the potential to duplicate nearly any ability, and so it's simply Overcategorisation (and a hindrance to navigation) to include the character in every ability-related category. - jc37 20:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Guess I see what you. I'll remove it in a few. BTW, mind taking a look at Jafar (Aladdin) and Genie (Aladdin)? Could use some of that category cleanup. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok. done. - jc37 20:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

red links
I'm confused, why should animeondvd.com be a wikilink when it gives a red link? Dandy Sephy (talk) 12:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Because of WP:RED. Take a look at what links to AnimeOnDVD.com. It is likely that it will become an article someday. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

World of Warcraft hatnote
Hi, Just spotted your tweak to the hatnote - I was going to put the disambiguator, as I spend lots of time correcting links to dab pages just that way, but I had a feeling that adding it here would encourage people to think that "Wow" was not being used for the dab page so was free to be redirected to the game article again! Let's hope not. WoW was previously redirecting to Wow, but it seemed reasonable to let that one capitalisation go to the game article, hence the hatnote. And I found another couple of "Wow" redlinks to dab and add to the dab page while I was at it, by checking the "What links here". Hope all is now well with it. PamD (talk) 08:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Twilight (comics)
Good find - I've set it up and addressed some of the issues. One remains: Twilight (comic book) isn't that helpful (as there are a number) and I was thinking about moving it to Twilight (DC Comics) which currently has a slim disambiguation page. The issue that caused this (Twilight (Supergirl) occupying the top slot) has been resolved with the move to its final home. I think it'd be fine to move Twilight (comic book) over that page and add a hatnote to the Supergirl character which should resolve things as far as I'm concerned.

A tangentially related issue is that I have run across quite a few set indices in film and added some to the basic category Category: Set indices but there already enough there to warrant their own section. I did raise it with the Film Project and didn't get much of a response. While I'd prefer more active members of the project to get to grips with this it doesn't make much sense to leave so many sitting around somewhere general when they could easily be moved off to their own category (and there are a lot more that could be moved to this - they also have a disambiguation category that has a lot of articles in it) so I was wondering what you thought. Perhaps if we give it a start then it will evolve naturally but I don't have the time to chase up every example and add it. (Emperor (talk) 15:10, 13 November 2008 (UTC))


 * I'm not finding the other publications, do you have links?


 * Atm, I'd agree with Twilight (DC Comics) for the character, with a hatnote to Twilight (comic book) (or Twilight (DC Comics publication) if necessary). - jc37 15:23, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually I'm arguing for the comic book to be moved to Twilight (DC Comics), as there are other Twilight comic books, so this needs changing.


 * What other publications do you want links to? I'm not sure what you are referring to. (Emperor (talk) 23:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC))
 * What other Twilight comic books are there? I'm only finding one. - jc37 03:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * There are the DC Comics and Avatar Press titles (technically the latter is one mini-series and a one-shot that was going to be a mini-series, both of which were reprinted with the second story finished in a final series). Also following naming conventions (and previous discussion) we disambiguate: "(comics)," "(DC Comics)" (or similar publisher) and then is we have run out of options then we disambiguate by type (like "comic book)"). Such cases are rare, for example Atlas (story arc), although where the main slot would be the focus of both "(comics)" and "(DC Comics)" it does get used more often, e.g. Superman (comic book) and Batman (comic book). These are the rare exceptions and the disambiguation can usually be sorted out well before reaching the need to disambiguate by type. (Emperor (talk) 04:51, 18 November 2008 (UTC))

Aladdin (cartoon) is a tricky one. There are others: Aladdin (1993 film), Aladdin and the King of Thieves, Aladdin and His Magic Lamp and Aladdin and His Wonderful Lamp so it could be viable. The name does seem... clunky and "cartoon" feels a little loose. However, I am unsure what the disambiguation is in this area. If there isn't one then perhaps Aladdin (animation) might be better, but again I don't know. That said all but one are films so you could make an argument for turning Aladdin (film) into a set index, but given that it could be argued the Disney film deserves the top spot and it'd be a lot of work chasing the incoming links. So that is a long way of saying.... dunno. (Emperor (talk) 23:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC))


 * Right then - that clinches it. Go for it and I'll drop the links in and format it. (Emperor (talk) 23:51, 13 November 2008 (UTC))


 * I'd hatnote from Aladdin (film). Not sure about the TV series - if you are there you won't be looking for the others which are all films. Redirects? Aladdin animation, Aladdin cartoons and Aladdin animated film (and possibly some variations on the theme). (Emperor (talk) 00:14, 14 November 2008 (UTC))

Wow links
Hi, I see you've remodeled a couple of my additions to Wow: is there some guideline or policy which you reckon justifies the very long links rather than my versions? To me, such long links seem unnecessary, but I don't want to get into an edit war about it! PamD (talk) 23:46, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * When it comes to pipe links, that's how I see most dabs formatted. It's something I got from User:JHunterJ, my mentor. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:50, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Iron Man
There are a few categories there which I don't think directly apply to him. I know strength has to go since it is not an inborn skill, but what about the others? Please reply on your talk page, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:47, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * See the page's edit history. - jc37 05:34, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I made similar edits to War Machine, but shouldn't the cyborg cats be taken off both of them? Can't seem to find a source that verifies these. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:37, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe that "cyborg" has to do with issues of Tony Stark's heart. Perhaps that will help with your searches. - jc37 16:52, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Right, and the other guy? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:53, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Rhodes? Nothing I can think of off-hand. - jc37 16:55, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, took it off Rhody. Will you be watching both pages in case someone tries to add them back? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:00, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll leave that to you. - jc37 17:02, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Lists for characters who fly
You do realize we have List of fictional characters who can fly and List of characters who can fly? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:21, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I spotted it after-the fact of spending so much time listifying the category per Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_October_28.
 * I'm waiting to merge them until the other cats are listified. That way the table list can be split as well.
 * Incidentally, unless I'm misreading, mew and mewtwo have all the abilities of the pokemon, so as "omnipotent characters" probably shouldn't be categorised in all ability cats. - jc37 17:25, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, Mew's article makes note of this. Can't say the same for Mewtwo (it is a genetically modified clone so it may or may not be the same case). Shouldn't there be a category for "fictional omnipotents"? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:34, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You'd be better off as a list so that you could explain in each case.
 * List of omnipotent entities
 * Make sure you note in the introduction to not include divine characters like deities/gods, angels, demons/devils, or ifrit/djinn/genies. (Else your list will become so huge as to be unmanageable.) - jc37 17:41, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Seems like a bad idea to listify something like that, see Articles for deletion/List of omnipotent fictional characters. Found an old mirror site though, . I was thinking it could help with the categorization. Or do you really think we should risk creating another list? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:48, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


 * You could re-create it, but only if the new list had each member sourced. (And the topic of omnipotence sourced.)
 * And that's the issue with making it a category. Unless each member was sourced, then the category can't exist either, per WP:CAT.
 * So try for the list, if you think you can source it, else, don't bother if you think you can't. - jc37 17:55, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You're asking the wrong guy for sources. Actually I don't have any eagerness to start a list anytime soon. That said, I noticed that you took off the flight cat from Aang, why didn't you also remove the martial artist one? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:08, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Because I have enough tongs in the fire : )
 * Since it can be argued about whther a martial art is a "superhuman" ability, I haven't been mass removing them from omnipotent characters. Though you may be correct in that that should happen. Feel free to be bold but not reckless.
 * That said, if you see some sub-cat under Category:Martial arts that would seem to be appropriate, feel free to dab the cat. - jc37 18:18, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe, however, I wouldn't go through with a mass removal just yet. Now then, what shall we do to Mew and Mewtwo? I still think it's wrong to assume that Mewtwo is the same as Mew without a verifiable source. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:33, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, Mew is omnipotent as a pokemon. As for Mewtwo, are there sources for any of the character's abilities? Also, is there a source for being a "clone"? At this point, I would lean on sources. - jc37 18:40, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll begin a thread on Talk:Mewtwo asking for sources. As for Mew, go ahead and remove the categories per what you said. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:47, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a plan. - jc37 18:54, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, the section #Design and characteristics pretty much cites all of those categories. Is there something specific you had in mind? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:03, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


 * (De-dent) Well, in reading over the references, I note this:
 * "Level/area: Mewtwo Trophy #1 description. (3 December 2001) “A genetically created Pokémon, Mewtwo is the result of many long years of research by a solitary scientist. Although Mewtwo was cloned from the genes of the legendary Pokémon Mew, its size and character are far different than its ancestor. Its battle abilities have been radically heightened, making it ruthless.” "
 * From that quote, and other, in general it looks like the characters are the same except for shape/size, and personality.
 * That said, the talk page query sounds like the right route. - jc37 19:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Would you care to drop a note there? Guess you could do what you want. I don't care that much about it either way. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:17, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thought you had already : ) - jc37 19:19, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I was gonna until I read that section. But like I said, do what you think is best. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:26, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, thanks. Checking into it now. - jc37 19:28, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Anime and Manga
Incidentally, did you happen to subcategorize anyone else who is anime/manga-related but appeared somewhere else first? Just want to make sure. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:01, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm honestly not sure, but I don't think so. Feel free to check out Category:Anime and manga characters who can fly.
 * I would guess that the subcats of Category:Anime and manga characters by ability probably could use some cleanup anyway. - jc37 23:27, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Two things
1) What did you mean by "not human"?

2) This seems an awful lot like speculation. We really shouldn't go by what we believe, otherwise, it's original research.

Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:04, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Well for #1, these are cats of characters with "superhuman" abilities. An eagle could be said to have the "superhuman" ability to fly, but obviously we shouldn't consider it "superhuman". (And before you ask, once we get into the realm of aliens, then it's "paranatural" instead of "superhuman". And we tend to just group together paranatural, supernatural, and superhuman, for convenience.)


 * For #2, when it comes to magic, if the source material groups such things as one of many diverse "magical abilities", then it should be removed. However in this case, the source material suggests that while this was called "magic", it wasn't an actual "magical" ability. And yes, when they're borderline like this, I think we're better off including than disincluding. (In order to try to avoid WP:OR.)


 * And while we're on the subject of Mandrake, all comics characters should be categorised by country of publication, and, if possible, by publisher. That article is "fun" because it's for the publication and the character. So it needs to be categorised in both trees. - jc37 02:16, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Then can you edit the description at Category:Fictional characters with accelerated healing to reflect what you just said?


 * And Jc37, I'm really uncomfortable with adding in unsourced categories, especially those concerning superhuman abilities. I'm thinking we should take this a little more seriously. Information has to be specifically referenced in the context of its page or else the category has to go. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:34, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what you're wanting changed.


 * And I didn't think I was suggesting adding unsourced info. I was suggesting that when we're unsure if the "source" of an ability is "magic", to go ahead and include the ability, rather than go near WP:OR by removing. - jc37 02:45, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * If we go by that logic, then we should re-insert Category:Marvel Comics telepaths back into Doctor Strange. It's just a bad idea. Unless there's a clear source that says Mandrake's telepathic powers have nothing to do with magic, the category should be removed. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:51, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well if you want to get technical, telepathy/hypnosis is his ability per the source material, not general "magic". However, it's borderline whether that telepathy/hypnosis should be considered magic even according to the author (ah the wonders of every author having their own definition of "magic"). As such, we avoid original research in this case by adding both, since both would seem to be true. - jc37 03:09, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I still don't agree with that. What about Strange's case? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:20, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If you still don't agree, then I think your next step would be to ask this at WT:CMC.
 * As for Dr. Strange (presuming you mean the one from Marvel Comics), I belive that his training was in magic. (Sorceror Supreme). So the two wouldn't seem to be comparable. - jc37 11:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Puff adder
After restoring the AARTalk template on the Puff adder talk page:
 * I'm sure this one was ok

Why? It's not an article, so it has no content to speak of and is probably not going to be rated. Or do you think we should make a separate category for AAR disambig pages of various import? (PS -- Please answer here, as I've temporarily added your talk page to my watchlist). --Jwinius (talk) 20:28, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It's just that I've seen disambiguation pages and set index articles templated as such. Though if you think it's wrong, I guess the talk page could do without it. WP:AAR probably doesn't care about it anyway. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:34, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It's the first time I've seen it used this way. AFAIK, the AARTalk template was only intended to assess articles with. After all, a disambiguation page doesn't need a rating, photos, a taxobox, etc. I'm going to remove it and I encourage you to do the same in other such cases. Cheers, --Jwinius (talk) 21:01, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed. I'll use this discussion as a precedent ;) Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:04, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Set index
Re: Twilight (comics). A set index, eh? I'd hadn't heard of that before. Reading WP:SETINDEX, however, it seems like set indexes should be used for comparing apples with apples, and we seem to be comparing apples with oranges (and kiwis). The page lists comics characters, comic book series, and comic book storylines. Sure, they're all comics-related, but they're not exactly the same thing. Is this really a situation where you'd want to use a set index instead of a disambiguation page? Since I'm not that familiar with it, I'll defer to your judgment. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 02:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * User:Emperor is the one who handles most of those pages. He knows more about them than me. I just have a bunch of them on my watchlist to help him out. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:10, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * That's cool. I'll go pester him. :-) --GentlemanGhost (talk) 02:11, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Fictional novels
Thanks for reverting me - I probably shouldn't have assumed redundancy where none existed. Cheers, Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:35, 18 November 2008 (UTC)