User talk:Xevious/Archive

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:


 * Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try How to edit a page.
 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use 	 ~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type (3 tildes).
 * You can experiment in the test area.
 * You can get help at the Help Desk
 * Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines, Neutral point of view, Civility, What Wikipedia is not

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop us a note at New user log.

-- utcursch | talk to me

Cite sources
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Paul Dacre, but we regretfully cannot accept original research. Please find and add a reliable citation to your recent edit so we can verify your work. Uncited information may be removed at any time. Thanks for your efforts, and happy editing! Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 10:18, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Please be aware that the unreferenced comments you recently added to this article border upon libel. Do not replace them unless you can provide credible sources which corroborate these allegations.  Thanks.  Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 10:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Hedgerley
I am not asking for an argument, but I feel it was out of order that you reverted my removal of trivial text from the Hedgerley page. Such an addition to an encyclopædic description of a village is patent nonsense: it is banal, non-memorable and a waste of space. And to be quite frank, no one really cares, and the novelty for "whoever it was whose house was on the television for all of five seconds" will have worn off a week after it has happened. I am surprised that you considered it appropriate to reinstate it, and am hoping it was merely just because it was it had no description - for to revert it, with full knowledge of the content of the text, is either spiteful, ignorant, or foolishly anti-wikipedian (how the removing of any pointless information needs extra clarification can be declared progressive, for anything other than rooting out prolific poor contributors, is absurd). It would be helpful if you could declare your motives for yesterday's actions. Maramotus 18:26, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thank you very much with your help on Everybody Votes Channel and User talk:TJ Spyke. It is much appreciated. TheCoffee 15:31, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Please block 66.228.70.170
Can you block User talk:66.228.70.170?--he vandalized the page on Ryan Bennett, and I noticed you already warned him. Thanks Reds0xfan 16:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

RE Wii availability
The text seems too broad to be attributed to a singular source. A small part of it is already noted within the Wii article. The best course of action is to leave it out. Just64helpin 17:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The "Launch" subsection contains a bit about shortages, which is what I was referring to. Thanks for the links!  I'm sure I can type up something using those as a reference. Just64helpin 18:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Assessment from an article page
Thank you for helping out with the Biography assessment drive. Good news. Outriggr recently designed a script that will cut youf biography assessment time down by about ten fold (what took ten hours now may only take one hour with Outriggr's script). For more information, please see the 'assessment from article page' discussion. -- Jreferee 20:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 23:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Substituting templates
Hi Xevious, thanks for your help in reverting vandalism.

Can I ask you to observe the good practice of substituting the template with the text in order to reduce the load on the server. If the templates remains unsubstituted then every time a page is visited all the templates will need to load their text from the source. A template is substituted by adding subst: to the start of the template text. For example. Regards LittleOldMe 11:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Age category
Hello! If you are receiving this message, that means that your user page is in a specific year category. Per a recent user-category per deletion, all specific year categories are to be deleted. If you wish to continue using year categories, you have two options: If you wish, you may do both. Hopefully, this change in categorization will be quick and painless. Happy editing! --An automated message from MessedRobot 12:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Using an age group category, such as Category:Wikipedians in their 30s
 * Using a decade category, such as Category:Wikipedians born in the 1970s.

Wii Channels
The size of an article doesn't legitimize splitting it up into smaller, less notable articles. The ones I merged had no notability on their own. Have you consider following the teachings of "sofixit"? I merged it. If you want to trim it, trim it. Nothing in the Wii Channel needs its own article, so you're going to have to keep trimming it to a manageable but informative size. - A Link to the Past (talk) 13:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Everybody Votes had an AfD which resulted in "redirect and protect". Wouldn't the logical thing for you to say be "I have to show that it's notable enough to have the AfD result overturned"?
 * Also, at no point does the "long article" header suggest that as long as an article is split, there's nothing wrong with how you split it. Wikipedia does NOT advise people to split articles into a bunch of smaller articles that, by themselves, lack any notability. - A Link to the Past (talk) 14:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * So basically, anything that comes out on the Wii Channel deserves an article? There are articles on Everybody Votes because game pages do GAME NEWS. I think it goes without saying that it would have news articles about it by default. - A Link to the Past (talk) 16:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You brought up the fact that news sites reported on it as notability. It's a newsworthy fact - people do news on specific features of video games (like a feature found in Spectrobes), does not mean that they warrant articles. It's a feature available on a Wii, that's not notable enough for its own article. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 1. That's not policy. 2. The news articles don't assert its notability, they assert its existence. Many things get covered on video game news web sites, I don't see why this is the only one who both gets an article and only gets it because people wrote news about it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The fact that your only source is that newspapers did news on a new feature for a popular video game console is just that - the only thing you could logically use to back up it being an article. Besides being covered in newspaper (which is not uncommon for video games), why is a single, new channel for the Wii notable? Should every feature of Xbox Live be given an article? - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:28, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * And why do you think that is so? Because there is more to say about the Xbox Live content. With the stuff merged into Xbox Live's article, I'd suspect that it would have too much content. However, before and after the content was merged to Wii Channels, there wasn't even an advisory saying how big it is, let alone one that says it's too big. Split it when there's too much content. - A Link to the Past (talk) 13:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Xbox Live Marketplace and Xbox Live Arcade are so significantly larger than Everybody Votes. And the Vision thing is hardware, not software. Xbox Live doesn't have articles based on every little obscure thing about it - which, I assure you, has had news articles done on its existence. Hell, Xbox Live ACHIEVEMENTS are probably more significant than Everybody Votes. That has been covered so much more than Everybody Votes has, because it's a first in the industry - no other system had Achievements. Individual games like AWDS had them, but there has never been a system put in place for developers to just add to their game. However, THAT doesn't have an article. But anyway, you originally claimed that Everybody Votes couldn't be merged because it made the article "Too big". But when I merged three (I think it was three) articles, it wasn't even an issue, size. Wii Channels won't be "too big" for a very long time. - A Link to the Past (talk) 13:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Apology
While I still feel that most of the Wii Channels do not warrant their own articles at this time, I should have conducted myself. However, in the future, I will not "bother" to discuss all merges, merely those that I don't think will be controversial (and will check discussions to make sure there weren't move discussions already). But if I do merge a seemingly uncontroversial article, I will not edit war in a situation where someone unmerges it, but rather, discuss it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)