User talk:Zero1328/Archive1

Speedy tagging
Hi, please only add speedy delete tags to articles which meet the criteria for speedy deletion. Fefnir does not. Kappa 01:01, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, I think it meets the criteria. It doesn't have a source for it, and it was made by the same person who made the Harpuia Article. Seems to be made up and stuff. Zero1328 01:13, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Please explain which criterion it meets. Kappa 01:16, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Uh, no idea really. Just never mind it then. It's just that there isn't any source, and I've never heard of half of those things about Fefnir and Harpuia. Zero1328 01:36, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Megaman Discussion

 * About the Image talk:Mmz4.gif; I'm the one who uploaded that image, and yes, I did indeed "steal" it from Megaman-Network. It looked like Official Art, ans I could not find any other pictures for the Megaman Zero 4 article, so I used that. I did not anticipate that it would bring up a uproar such as this, and after looking at the dicussion forum on Megaman-Network, I see I've made quite a mistake. I aplogize for my hastiness in uploading articles, and I plan to apoligize to the Megaman-Network for not thinking. So go ahead and delete the picture if its causing too much issues; I guess we'll just have to wait for official box art instead.

-MegamanZero

Oh, and about merging the Harpuia, Fefnir, etc. articles; what's up with that..? I think they're at least important enough to deserve thier own pages...

-MegamanZero


 * About the merging of Harpuia and Fefnir articles, I think you'll find it's because there are two articles of each (not including the main list of Megaman zero characters) and the person who suggested the merger thought that having two articles was redundant. Wolf ODonnell 20:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Private servers link in Ragnarok Online
Please, before remove Private Servers link of the Ragnarok Online article discuss it first. Wikipedia isn't what a member think, but what a consensus of the community thinks. Thanks for your understanding. --Brazil4Linux 00:45, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts II article
If you haven't noticed already, if you look at the History for the Kingdom Hearts II article, it looks like I reverted edits made by you. Well, that's false. If you click on your name (which is red in the edit summary) it leads to an anonymous IP address, which means that I had dropped a left or right bracket somewhere.

So, I was really reverting back to your revision and deleting that of an anon.

Sorry if there was any confusion. --&#39;Ivan 18:12, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

None at all, Ivan. In fact, I just got back from school, so I'm quite unaware of any recent happenings. Thanks for the heads up, anyway. Zero1328 05:34, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Please check at Orginzation XIII talk for reply relating to Vexen, & left credits relating to Org members on KH2 page alone for now. Especially if they have evidence backing them up.Fractyl

Zero, I noticed you reverted the additions I made to the Kingdom Hearts page. I hadn't noticed until you reverted them that I was adding things for Kingdom Hearts II on the wrong page! ^^;;; Thanks for correcting my mistake, I just feel a little silly now is all. --(Godfoster 09:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC))
 * Haha, don't worry about it. Everyone is bound to make mistakes every now and then. - Zero1328 10:48, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Zero, Regarding the ???'s I put in on the KH2 page for Piglet and Barbossa, I placed them there as placeholders because they were credited for the Japanese cast list on that page already, but not for the English. I figured it would be more noticeable if there was something that stood out to say "Hey there! I'm missing some info here!" instead of having people read EVERY name and double check to find out which ones were missing. --(Godfoster 08:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC))
 * Oh, well, that's a good idea, sorry for the confusion. It's usually a good idea to add an edit summary on anything that might be regarded as odd/different/standing out/major/etc/can'tthinkofanymoresynonyms when you put it in. - Zero1328 08:46, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah, I suppose that would have helped as well. I'll be sure to include an edit summary next time I make a similar edit.  Thanks again!  --(Godfoster 09:07, 5 April 2006 (UTC))

Your Habitat
I never knew you lived in Aus. Master Vinaki 16:30 6 March 2006 (EST)
 * Well, I expected people to be turned away at the first sentence of my User page. Zero1328 06:30, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Im' back Master Vinaki 09:22, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Colonel
Please see Talk:Colonel (Mega Man). I'm trying to attempt an concensus. -ZeroTalk 13:33, 21 April 2006 (UTC)


 * ....and MegamanZero's at fault for replying. - Zero1328 12:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Excuse me..? When a dispute rears its mandibles on a talkpage, and I am a part of the dispute, it is up to me as a defender of included content to support my reasoning. To not respond whould be a travesty. Perhaps I could comprehend if I constructed personal attacks or the like, but I cannot refrain from contributing to discussion on talkpages, no matter how inane and nonsensical they may be. And yes, we need to solve this. Its about nigh time yon chap recieved a block for his comments. -ZeroTalk 13:31, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I am feeding the troll though, and I need to understand that. His baseless arguments are not assisting any point he's attempted to convey, so I'll cease replying to him on the talkpage. He can troll about as he pleases. But I ask he just doesn't take it out on the articles. Beacuse that would make me cross. I really don't think he wants me cross. -ZeroTalk 14:12, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You answered yourself right there, when he said he is giving up on the dispute, I had accepted that it was over.. I believed nothing more was needed to be said, but he continued anyway.. which is pretty much trolling in my book. - Zero1328 05:38, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Content insertion
See Talk:Mega Man X (character). -ZeroTalk 16:11, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I know. This fellow doesn't quite comprehend how this site operates. I'm currently discussing this with him on the List of Neo Arcadian boss characters talkpage. He seems to have been misled into thinking we permit unsourced statements and an abudance of fan-site material. That's somewhat dissapointing. I've taken to reverting his revisions until this is understood and I'm inclined to believe its vandalism along with his personal attacks on the talkpage. -ZeroTalk 10:48, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Userpage message
''Hey! Who are you? What're you doing here? Go back to reading and editing articles! '' - Zero1328


 * Oh but I want read more of your userpage. :) -ZeroTalk 10:42, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not responsible for anything that happens to you if you don't do what that says. - Zero1328 Talk? 10:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I R DESTROYING WOOKOPEDIA! I MUST GET BACT TO ARTICLE WRITING! :) -ZeroTalk 10:59, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Zero1328! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. &mdash;Xyra e l / 15:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 15:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion message
Regarding the article Image:MarioClash.jpg, which you tagged for speedy deletion with the reason "redundant", I wanted you to know that I have removed the speedy deletion tag. This article does not qualify for speedy deletion because to speedily delete an image as redundant, you must specify the image which replaces it. If you still want the article to be deleted, please use the WP:IFD process. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 12:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry. I was kind of in a hurry to get it deleted, and was not aware that I had to supply the other image. I'll keep that in mind in the future. I put it back up for speedy. - Zero1328 Talk? 12:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Playstation inline rv
Duly noted. Forget the talk page, I just rewrote that whole confusing section, minus in-depth discussion of transverse paths. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.25.201 (talk • contribs)

Why the message?
Why did you send me a message acussing me of vandalism? Please explain. I'm basically new to Wikipedia, so I don't know how what I did could be considered vandalism. And whatever it was, sorry.

-Karasuhebi
 * Your additions to Organisation XIII. - Zero1328 Talk? 08:35, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Biometals
See here:. Should I move this out to mainspace...?

I also did a redesign for the uniform template being implemented in the Mega Man articles here. Comments would be welcome at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Computer_and_video_games. -Randall Brackett 15:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That, is really.. really good. go ahead and put it in, except replace Live Metal with Biometal. - Zero1328 Talk? 06:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * (I don't really want to intrude into your sandbox and all, so I'll wait for you to put it in before I copyedit/edit it.) - Zero1328 Talk? 06:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay. Should I make a seperate article for it or merge it into Mega Man weapons...? -Randall Brackett 22:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I would say make a brief overview (similar to the MMZ section) in Mega Man weapons and give more detail in it's own article or Wikibooks, such as backstory/attacks, but there isn't really much to begin with. I say put it in Mega Man weapons. - Zero1328 Talk? 05:37, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Discussion for personality sections on Gate and Talk:Vile (Mega Man X). -Randall Brackett 00:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Borderline trolling?
How do you figure?? -SaturnYoshi 08:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Your reasons are very valid, but Wikipedia has a policy of Assuming good faith and No personal attacks. You also include your personal feelings, which are irrelevant to the discussion. Wikipedia is not a forum. - Zero1328 Talk? 09:08, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Video Games Collide
Which CSD criterion did you refer to here ? Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/email 04:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I thought spam was valid criteria for speedy deletion, but I guess I was incorrect on that. - Zero1328 Talk? 04:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Megaman X armors for deletion
Hello,

I saw the proposed deletion and read your explanation. I Agree that the article is excessivly game-guidish in some points. But I believe there are informations in it that are too intresting to be deleted (It was for that reason that I recreated the article).

The article needs some changes (for example, delete de parts/abilities tables and replace for a short description of the armor abilities), but I don't think it must be deleted. I'm going to make some of these changes and hope that other users help in make the content of this article more intresting and less game-guidish.

(P.S. : I apologize for any gramatical error that I possibly made. English is not my first Language.)SpekkioBR 23:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * There's no need to apologise to me for any grammatical errors you make. Your English is quite good. My opinion is that the whole thing should go into a video game based wiki, such as WikiKnowledge (look at this,) or merged into Mega Man weapons. You decide. - Zero1328 Talk? 05:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Falling Sand Game
I would like to comment on the removal of the falling sand game, is it not shareware/freeware ? How would this article be viotating copyright laws when the source file has been taken and modified many times with different "mods" of it. If the original indeed was under a copyright and or/ patent of intellectual rights, wouldn't all of these sites hosting the original version and the translated versions have been taken down, more importantly the severely modified versions ; burning sand, hell sand, etc.

I am not the creator of the article nor the program(s) in question, but would like to see a valid link to information portraying the copyright patent for this program and/or a valid reason.

Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.158.167.147 (talk)


 * I listed the article as a copyright violation because if you look at the article, and compare it to the following links:, , and , the information on the article is a direct copy of these pages. It's been like this for about six months, so editing has taken place, but the resemblance is very clear. This information was made by someone and even though it's a fansite, this text was directly copied off it. It's also not clear which copied off which. I mentioned this on Falling Sand Game's talk page. - Zero1328 Talk? 05:31, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Ahh ok, thanks for clearing that. Not familiar with using wikipedia really, sorry for the format of my question taking up your page (atleast it appeared to on my side) Also apologies for even creating this as you said it was on the talk page, did not know that there was one for it.

Thanks again and sorry for wasting your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.32.32 (talk)


 * I'm not bothered at all, there's no need to apologise for that. - Zero1328 Talk? 00:08, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Since you’re the one that initiated this whole mess why don't you see if you can do something to expedite the removal of your copyvio? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.135.135.233 (talk)


 * Sounds like a good idea, but an admin will get to it eventually anyway. - Zero1328 Talk? 05:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, there
I see you've gotten into a bit of a dispute with 70.135.108.251; the situation's unfortunately escalated a bit more than I'd like, so all I'll ask is that you continue to assume good faith, remain civil, and avoid biting to the best of your abilities. Thanks. The sooner we can get this situation calmed down, and start discussing things instead of flaming, the better. :) Luna Santin 11:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

You're link to the screenshot
The screenshot you referred to for the namage of "Pi" is not found. Please relink. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Psypho (talk • contribs)
 * It appears that there's a hotlinking block. try accessing it directly. - Zero1328 Talk? 05:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

A warning about Yu-Gi-Oh! media and release information
I've been watchlisting that article since it started, and I've had several conflicts with those users giving you problems now. For some reason, they're insanely stubborn. The main one was User:Jsmith, but I think he may have re registered under one of those other names or something. But yeah, any time a translation change was made, he'd revert it, and some times when a new dub title was released and added to the page he'd revert it. I honestly have no idea what's going on in his/their head, but they're ridiculously stubborn about it for whatever reason. The Splendiferous Gegiford 17:28, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

ro-guardians.com
Hi, I'm not sure why you've deleted link to ro-guardians.com. Please check www.ro-guardians.com/forums/. It's one of the largest Ragnarok forums online. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.23.205.47 (talk)


 * External links should only be there for sourcing and additional information, links to Forums and such aren't really acceptable, except maybe just one or two links. There's already enough there. - Zero1328 Talk? 10:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Also what about www.runningforums.com on Running definition? There is no other link pointing on other large running forum. It would be really helpfull to others runners. Why do you consider this as a spam? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.23.205.47 (talk)
 * Like I said, they're not really acceptable.. here, read this. - Zero1328 Talk? 11:21, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandal tags
Thank you for reverting vandalism on Wikipedia! Be sure to put warning tags on the vandal's user talk page (such as,  ,  ,  ). Add each of these tags on the vandal's talk page, in sequential order, after each instance of vandalism. Adding warnings to the talk page assists administrators in determining whether or not the user should be blocked. If the user continues to vandalize pages after you add the  tag, request administrator assistance at Request for Intervention. Again, thank you for helping to make Wikipedia better.--Dylan Lak e 21:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Weekly
Actually, that was me signing up for Wikipedia Weekly. I'm not sure why the edit wasn't attributed to my account, as I was logged in at the time. That IP is actually my school's IP, which I dislike because people at my school tend to vandalize and get me autoblocked. Sorry for any misunderstanding! Shadow1 (talk) 23:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Isometric projection
You deleted an allegedly "identical" image which was not in fact "identical" at all. Please use more caution in future. AnonMoos 12:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

All Caps
I typed up a little note here, when a few minutes later I found this. bleh. - Zero1328 Talk? 10:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

( The section your reply fell in was actually a mirrored post from a talkpage somewhere - I like to mirror all discussions with other Wikipedians on my talk page, but I forgot to annote whose talk page it came from. Sorry if that. )

The actual guide is located at Manual of Style (capital letters), because we decided that it would be better to make it part of the capital letters guide. I see you have already found the original discussion page from before the merge, Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (ALL CAPS). There has been more discussion about this here and maybe elsewhere too, but I'm not an archaeologist.

The decision to restrict the use of ALL CAPS is not an uncommon one, and is found in more electronic as well as traditional publications. It's just a matter of professionalism, really. Shinobu 11:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I stumbled upon another discussion about this: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (trademarks) I found What's in a nAME(cq)? by Bill Walsh quite informative (and enternaining). Shinobu 12:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I would really like accuracy depending on how the creator of the name writes the text, but for titles that are clearly written for emphasis and are not written that way normally, should be written normally, like "ROE v. WADE". This relies on common sense, and will be a problem. I think romanised Japanese names are kinda borderline exempt, like MISIA as the actual writing, as indicated everywhere. Same for .hack//SIGN. (If you need an opinion on this if someone raises it, use mine, I'll likely not follow policy-related discussions) - Zero1328 Talk? 12:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Except that writing Misia in all caps is nothing more than character formatting, designed to make the name stand out. As Bill Walsh wrote, everything you need to know about capitalization you learned in school. Misia is a proper noun, and should therefore be capitalised as "Misia". The spelling MISIA is essentially logo, designed to stand out and attract attention. Of course she and/or her label would like everyone to use that "logo spelling", because it makes her stand out everywhere, but no one has any obligation to do so. Capitalization has a function - it makes reading easier by indicating through formatting things like the start of sentences, proper nouns and acronyms. If everyone decides for themselves how their (company)name is capitalized, this use is subverted and (should it become more pervasive) it would make text more difficult to read. Morale: no one is above basic typography. This has very little, if anything at all, to do with accuracy - if we wanted to accurately reflect the layout and formatting of Misia's logo, we could include an album cover or something similar. Oh wait, we already do that.

PS: @"If you need an opinion on this if someone raises it, use mine": very cute. I already have lots of opinions, on this and on other things. This is not to say I invented these. I happen to have an interest in typography and regularly read websites about it, and own a professional styleguide. I also frequently think about how to do things, thereby weighing in what I've read before, what the consequences would be if something would be universally followed, and ultimately, common sense and logic. Shinobu 13:49, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hm, you raise a number of good points. I think I'm going to back down from this discussion, I have a feeling that challenging the basics of grammar will get both of us nowhere, fast. - Zero1328 Talk? 21:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Modern Times
Hi, we have agreed with veinor in the point that the movie has been released under the creative commons licence so the link that i added can be there. ((unsigned|Bcartolo}}