User talk:Sephiroth BCR: Difference between revisions

15:21, Saturday 5 October 2024

User	Talk	Edit Count	Workshop	Sandbox	Userboxes	Accomplishments

Archives
User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 1 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 2 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 3 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 4 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 5 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 6 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 7 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 8 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 9 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 10 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 11 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 12 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 13 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 14 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 15 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 16 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 17 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 18 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 19 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 20 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 21 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 22 User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 23
How to archive a talk page

Welcome to my talk page. The general guidelines I follow on this page are outlined below.

• I welcome discussion here on Wikipedia related matters, but please refrain if you wish to contact me on other matters.
• Sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~)
• Be civil. I will be correspondingly polite.
• If you add personal attacks or vandalism to this page, it will be reverted.
• I am often busy in real life, and will not necessarily reply to messages with alacrity. Keep this in mind.
• I will respond on your talk page unless you specify that you want a response here, which I will oblige.
• If you are here to request my aid as an administrator, then please provide a thorough explanation of what you want done and why. If I am not available, then I would recommend one of the many pages where you can report such tasks for administrators to take care of the problem (i.e. WP:AIV for vandalism, WP:RFP for protection).
• I will archive every thirty topics. Please do not respond on archived discussions. If you wish to continue a conversation, start a new discussion on this page.

And that's it. Happy editing!

— sephiroth bcr ^(converse)

It seems I tuned out of the discussion and missed the developments, having been caught up with the Aitias arbitration request. I did take a look at it earlier today and was thinking of proposing a voluntary wiki-contract, as with Abtract and Sesshomaru in the early stages. However, as Collectonian refused to participate in it last time, and as I felt that DreamFocus would not agree to anything, it seemed pointless. I agree; RfC/U would be the better venue. Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:26, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps. But consider it this way; who's going to add anything further to it other than him? My prediction is it'll either help (relatively harmlessly) put himself at ease, or, he might end up finding a way to "resolve" this sooner. Btw, on a separate note, please check LHvU's talk page, asap. :) Ncmvocalist (talk) 12:01, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure a RfC/U is a good idea. We already had the WQA and it didnt work. --neon white talk 21:11, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We proceed to RfC/U because WQA was exhausted. If RfC/U doesn't work and is exhausted, then we proceed to the next step. At this point, that's the main purpose. The reason for not having involuntary restrictions is to avoid interfering with any good-faith attempts at dispute resolution. Ncmvocalist (talk) 06:49, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with these editors is that such discussions usually end up with them reeling off accusations none stop. How is it going to work. A RfC/U for both users seperate. I dont think you can do a double. --neon white talk 23:30, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He accidentally archived everything last night, a few hours after I posted something, the discussion still ongoing. Dream Focus 11:02, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, he deliberately archived it last night as a discussion that wasn't going anywhere. Although I said I missed the developments, I did review it for myself (in catch-up) prior to making the above comments. I agree with his assessment, and that it needs to go through RFC. As a result, I've reverted your edit; should Sephiroth BCR like to recommence those discussions, or have it reappear on this page, he will unarchive them. Still, you may make a duplicate of those discussions to appear on your own talk page if you wish, as long as you don't alter the contents. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:09, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. It seems odd he did that while it was still ongoing, just as my 24 hour block ended and I was able to respond it seems. Anyway, I copied them over to my talk page, to continue the discussion. I am curious for input on my last few questions. Dream Focus 21:20, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I noticed you were the one who succesfully nominated this list at FLC. I am planning to take it to WP:FLRC because, due to the dead links, so much of the list is unsourced. I marked the deadlinks back in January and forgot all about the list, until I noticed the latest cleanup listings. I just wanted to check that it is okay for me to nominate this. If you think you can fix it up a bit (find replacements for the dead links etc.), let me know and I will hold off nominating it for removal. Best wishes, Rambo's Revenge (How am I doing?) 13:10, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work, my immediate major concerns have been addressed. I'll try and re-review it properly at a later date but even if I find some more concerns I will run them by you instead of going to FLRC. Thanks for your speedy cooperation. Best, Rambo's Revenge (How am I doing?) 08:35, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I talked to User:Sumoeagle179, and I think it would benefit all of us if we could just step back and understand each other's POV. He raises good points, even though they could be phrased better. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:42, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We might see more activity coming your way... Dabomb87 (talk) 23:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you have to remember that that is a very quick list of pages that I am concerned about. I am only including very short lists (like the FLCL one), potential merges (like the THOH one) and articles more out of curiosity than anything. I figured that since I'm going through all FLs, I'd add them and see how many there are. The ones I am most conerned about (and will try to delist) are what I have labelled "Type A" (the content forks) although some of the duplicate lists and some of the ones that most fail WP:WIAFL will likely end up at FLRC some day too. I suppose I mis-categorized the two Oscar lists. They do seem a tad trivial and seem more suited to the Oscar website, but there is no place they could easily be merged. I'm also curious about what you think of all this, and my rather rambling confession. It will be hard going, but I would like to try to clean the process up as much as possible, and your help would be very appreciated. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 23:41, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of interest what is the procedure for merging FLs. For example, a consensus is forming to merge some FLs here, however one of those lists is also at FLRC. Basically do FLs have to be delisted before they can be merged? If not and they are turned into redirects is there some form of cascading delist, update FL stats etc. procedure or do I notify someone (you?). Thanks, Rambo's Revenge (How am I doing?) 21:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would be bold and just merge the contents. Then delist without the FLRC procedure, although someone would have to update {{articlehistory}} manually. Instructions are at User:Matthewedwards/FL. Finally, to be safe, I would bring the newly updated list to FLRC. Not for removal but for review. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, someone with a preexisting consensus to merge would bring the list to FLRC, which for all practical intents and purposes, will be a wash, but is nice for getting more eyes on the merge. If presented with a fait accompli of an already accomplished merge—generally what I don't want—then you can update the article history manually per Matthew. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:43, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks. You two seem to disagree about whether it should be done boldly or whether I should bring 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 to FLRC first. I think if there is doubt then the proper procedure (FLRC) should be followed. I can't see how the outcome would be any different to this current FLRC, but after that has finished I will bring all the other sublists to FLRC together, if you think that is okay. If those are then delisted I will then attempt to merge the sublists (there are some suprising subtle differences/errors) and then try my hardest to update the main list (out of date information from Fall 2007) and then bring that to FLRC. I know there are quite a few ifs and buts, but does it sound okay in principle? If you want me to do something different please do say. Best, Rambo's Revenge (How am I doing?) 09:53, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Be sure to consult User:Gimmetrow on all this; he's the man for botification and articlehistory stuff. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:List of members of the Commonwealth of Nations by date joined. Gimmetrow 23:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, so basically you're fine with it being done if the article history is updated manually. But wouldn't there be another problem if it didn't go through FLRC because that example still has a removal record, but if they didn't go to FLRC how would it be recorded there. I am thinking maybe it will be easier to take them to FLRC as a multiple nom. than attempt some merge & delist myself. Rambo's Revenge (How am I doing?) 23:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See also Talk:List of European Union member states by accession. If the merge is really settled, make sure to add the former lists to WP:FFL. Gimmetrow 23:28, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But doesn't it also need to be added to the log some how as that seems to be the only thing counting the delisted FLs (or am I wrong). Rambo's Revenge (How am I doing?) 23:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. I'm only really commenting on the AH aspect. You can link to anything in an ArticleHistory link field. If the FFL people want a FLR subpage for other reasons, then use one. The count of FFLs is also kept on the WP:FFL page. Gimmetrow 00:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On March 23, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article My Spanish Coach, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 08:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:34, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the new criteria revision passes, you could see a lot more activity at FLRC very soon. Do you think another delegate should be appointed? I've always liked the idea of having two, that way one can review and the other can close and there are other advantages (two opinions, less of a hassle if one delegate goes away, etc.). I was thinking maybe The Rambling Man could take the spot if he was interested. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:30, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just noticed that in December, someone removed the translated titles from the Bleach season lists[1], but I can't find any discussion nor consensus to support why this was done? Is this something new that I missed? -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:00, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For that matter, something I've always wondered is where the "official" English titles even come from. The episodes' title cards only show the episode numbers (e.g. Bleach 93), and DirecTV's program guide never lists English titles like it does for many other anime series (even if those titles are wrong most of the time). 「ダイノガイ千？！」^{(Dinoguy1000)} 20:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DVD sets? I hope? -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:51, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to the list of adopters, you're open for adoption... Would you be willing to consider me for adoption at all? --The Disappearing Commissar (talk) 14:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested in a wide variety of things as you can tell from my user page. Mainly history, and economic, political and philosophical theory. I also like watching anime, and I play a lot of strategy video games. --The Disappearing Commissar (talk) 14:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have performed the GA review for the article, and I am putting it on hold until two minor problems are fixed. These shouldn't be too difficult to pull off (translation: not at all) and after I would be more than happy to pass the article. You have really put a lot of time and work into the article, and it has come out excellent! Cheers! Scapler (talk) 01:21, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the improvements, I have passed the article for GA. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 09:41, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've already done it =) See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marrigreat. Not sure which one qualifies as "puppetmaster" and which as "puppet", but anyway ... cheers, cab (talk) 08:47, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I think we've hammered out a good revised Featured List criteria here. If this passes, there will be quite a few FLs (my estimate is somewhere between 50 and 75) that could soon be delisted just because of 3b. With that in mind, I'd like to get comments and opinions from all FLC regulars and everyone else who has participated in the discussion before it's implemented. Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 17:39, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:33, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The March 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As the only other "major" project member in the Haruhi task force who seems to be active, do you have any thoughts on the merger proposed at Talk:The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya#Merges of splits? -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:53, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know that you have 3 months from the date of creation of the article List of Bleach episodes (season 11), or until 7 June, to get it fully peer reviewed and added to the Seasons of Bleach FTC. Hope that's okay! :) rst20xx (talk) 13:54, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ookay, now both seasons 10 and 11 are under retention, to be FLed and PRed respectively - rst20xx (talk) 18:38, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Video games Newsletter

The WikiProject Video games Newsletter Volume II, No. 3 - March 2009 Archive before | Archive after To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list. Project At a Glance As of March 2009, the project has: 121 Featured articles 25 Featured Lists 15 Featured Topics 1 article in Featured Article Review 15 articles for Peer review 24 A-Class articles 303 Good Articles 2 Good Topics 3 articles in Good Article Review Changes to Featured and Good content Promoted FA/FL: Sam & Max: Freelance Police, Uru: Ages Beyond Myst Promoted FT: None Demoted FA/FL/FT: Oddworld: Abe's Oddysee Promoted AA: Pong, Rock Band (video game), Super Mario Bros. 3 Promoted GA: Dragon kill points, Final Fantasy (video game), First-person shooter, Halo Wars, Joseph Staten, Light gun shooter, LocoRoco, Machinima, Metroid, My French Coach and My Spanish Coach, Ninja Gaiden (NES), Planescape: Torment, Popotan, Shoot 'em up, Ultima Underworld: The Stygian Abyss Promoted GT: None Demoted GA/GT: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (NES) News There were 209 new articles in March 2009 Inactive project cleanup: Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found here. Old "left over" project pages have been added to a clean up page to discuss appropriate courses of action. Come help out and voice your thoughts. Several video game articles appeared on Wikipedia's main page this month. Congratulations to the contributing editors. A fact from Christopher Erhardt appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 3. A fact from St.GIGA appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 3. Giants: Citizen Kabuto was "Today's featured article" for Mar 5. A fact from Makoto Kanoh appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 6. A fact from Nintendo DSi appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 7. A fact from Clean Asia! appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 16. A fact from Gang Garrison 2 appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 22. A fact from 5th British Academy Video Games Awards appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 23. A fact from My French Coach and My Spanish Coach appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 23. A fact from 4th British Academy Video Games Awards appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 24. A fact from Monster Kingdom: Jewel Summoner appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 25 A fact from Male Restroom Etiquette appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 26. A fact from Rufus (Street Fighter) appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 27. A fact from Factions of Command & Conquer appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 29. A fact from Darkness over Daggerford appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 30. A fact from Bloody Fun Day appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 30. A fact from Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (video game) appeared in the Did you know? column on Mar 30. Editor KieferSkunk was interviewed by video game magazine Edge. Comments from the interview were used in an article in issue 199, and an abridged online version is available on their website. Kiefer has also provided the transcript of his interview. Reader Poll The WikiProject Video games Newsletter released its first issue a year ago. The newsletter is meant to help connect editors, keep them up-to-date with the activities of the VG project, and improve the knowledge of our members. We've compiled a list of questions to help gauge the effectiveness of the newsletter's first year. Answers will be accepted for a three week period following the deliver of the March 2009 issue on Wednesday, April 1, 2009. Just to clarify, this is not an April Fools' Day gag, and we would really appreciate honest criticism. Information obtained from this poll is intend to alter the newsletter for the better. So don't feel you should hold back or give answers similar to everyone else. Feel free to voice your opinion on the Poll page. Feature: VG Barnstar The Video Game Barnstar The VG Barnstar is an award given to Wikipedians recognized for efforts and contributions to improve and develop video game related articles. The VG Barnstar is one of many Wikipedia Barnstars designed to be given to editors that have helped further the overall quality of Wikipedia. It was created in February 2006 by Jacoplane—see past discussion for details—and has been given to numerous editors since. Sometimes editors with multiple Barnstars use an alternative way to display them: ribbons. Barnstars are designed to be given by anyone, so don't be shy as everyone enjoys appreciation. If you have noticed or have been impressed with the work of an editor, feel free to let them know by placing {{subst:Barnstar VG|"message" ~~~~}} on their talk page. The template uses a parameter to include a message expressing the reasons behind the award. See also Wikipedia:Service awards Wikipedia:Other awards Wikipedia:Personal user awards Things you can help with: Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks view watch edit history shell vg talk alerts purge AfDs Project Sora (3 participants) Sora Ltd. (3 participants) Endor AG (2 participants) DcVD (4 participants) Kleavor (6 participants) Aston Martin DP-100 (4 participants) Cue Club 2 (2 participants) GeneRally (2 participants) How (video game) (3 participants) Anti-Cheat Expert (6 participants) Planet Half-Life (3 participants; relisted) Flash Element TD (2 participants; relisted) Butterfree (10 participants; relisted) Ryo Sakazaki (7 participants; relisted) Merge discussions Project Sora (discussion) Sora Ltd. (discussion) Neo Geo Pocket (discussion) Screen Rant (discussion) Minecraft – Volume Beta (discussion) Other discussions No major discussions Featured content candidates Ada Wong (nom) The Sims 4 (nom) Smash Hit (nom) Five Nights at Freddy's: Help Wanted (nom) Good article nominations Donkey Kong (nom) Puff-puff (onomatopoeia) (start) Tina Armstrong (start) Birdo (nom) Shin Megami Tensei V (nom) Justin Yu (nom) Kim Kitsuragi (start) Miner 2049er (start) Pixel Piracy (start) Ether One (start) Yoshi's New Island (nom) Dr Disrespect (start) Pokémon Sword and Shield Expansion Pass (start) Async Corp. (start) Hotline Miami (start) Pokémon fan games (start) The Outer Worlds (start) River Raid (start) The Great Giana Sisters (start) Pikachu (start) Visions of Mana (start) Mario Party: Island Tour (start) Meltan (start) Bejeweled (video game) (start) Kleavor (start) Haunter (Pokémon) (start) DYK nominations Delibird Reviews and reassessments The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask (nom) Pokémon Channel (nom) Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (nom) A Space for the Unbound (rev) Tetris (NES video game) (rev) Articles that need... assessment (2) (4) reassessment (0) cleanup (8) infoboxes (18) cover art (252) screenshots (8,824) photos (66) translation from japan (189) creation merging Project Navigation VG Project Main pages Main project – talk Project category – talk Portal – talk VG Project Departments Assessment – talk Cleanup – talk Peer review – talk   Magazines – talk Newsletter – talk Video game images – talk

• Newsletter delivery by xenobot 17:00, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I just noticed that you protected page User talk:Dink Smallwood with "[create=sysop] (indefinite)" for being a "Grawp talk page", and that User:Dink Smallwood has never been blocked or banned. If that user starts editing again in such a manner as to deserve a warning, how is a non-sysop supposed to warn that user? Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 02:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sephiroth BCR. You have new messages at Jeff G.'s talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Remember User:Mr.Grave from issues with some other character lists, like List of Kuroshitsuji characters among others. He refused to use edit summaries, refused to discuss anything, kept adding OR and excessive plot, etc and generally just being contentious and disruptive. He is now pulling the same mess at List of The Pretender characters, trying to undo the character organization, add OR etc. I've had to revert him several times in the last week, and now he's just plain out trying to edit war and as this point I'm considering him a vandal as his edits are reverting the recent clean up of that list (which took me hours). Any thoughts on dealing with this? -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:22, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and congratulations on being elected as a coordinator for WikiProject Films! As the lead coordinator, I look forward to helping set an agenda for the WikiProject for this term and beyond, and I hope that you will actively participate in working through our agenda's objectives. I ask you to take a moment and review the goals of WikiProject Films (listed on the WikiProject's front page and reiterated here):

• To standardize the film articles in Wikipedia
• To improve Wikipedia coverage of films by adding, expanding and improving film articles
• To serve as a central point of discussion for issues related to Wikipedia film articles
• To provide the necessary framework to assist in bringing all articles within the project scope to the highest possible quality

Since you have stepped forward to take on the responsibilities of the coordinator position, my expectations are for you to play an active role in most coordinator-related discussions and to bring new ideas to the circle whenever possible. Since all seven of us will collaborate in discussions, I ask you to take a moment and leave a comment here about your background as an editor (I provided my own background). Outline what you believe your strengths and your weaknesses are, and summarize what you want to accomplish for WikiProject Films this term. ——Erik (talk • contrib) 12:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you take a moment to introduce yourself at the thread? :) The others have done so. —Erik (talk • contrib) 15:24, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Regarding Good Topics, I have worked on Apt Pupil (film) as part of a possible "Bryan Singer and his feature films" Good Topic (since the other feature films are Good Articles). So after Apt Pupil, Singer's article could be improved. Do you think his non-feature films Lion's Den and Public Access need to be under this umbrella, too? —Erik (talk • contrib) 01:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Started discussion at Talk:List of Bleach chapters#Splitting. Feel free to comment.Tintor2 (talk) 21:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm making comments at the above PR. Act on them if you wish. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:53, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the talk page before reverting? Do you read Jimbo's statement about a Zebra being a Zebra, and you didn't need someone to tell you that? Did you see the link to the people in the Battlestar Galactica season finale page arguing that needed a reference for every single statement in an article? If you mentioned what type of dog Lassie was, but no reviews existed confirming what type of dog it was, would you not be able to do that? If the plot of something involves the main character driving a certain type of car, but no one in the episode or in any reviews refer to that type of car by name, can you still call it that? If everyone can look up a picture of it, and confirm without any reasonable doubt that it is that car type, then should you still need to have a verifiable reference to a third party media source for it? Some people believe so. We need to make the policy clearer to avoid problems. Dream Focus 01:14, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:42, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Know about "admin coaching", but could you help "coach" me with being a better EDITOR (maybe I can even be able to get an article to Good/Featured article status). I just recently began adding sources to articles, and edit my sandboxes a LOT less (I still like to keep them, but now only mainly use them when I am worried about "screwing up" an article)... I think I now understand Fair Use policy (which during my RFA I didn't really understand... Also I would like to thank you very much for your helpful comment on my RFA. Also, I would like to know, is there any non-RFA way for me to get input as to what the community thinks about my editing? Thank you very much for your time. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 21:28, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What was that for?  :) [2] Black Kite 09:33, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you help promote many articles to FLs, so I was wondering if I could get your input on this article? Do you think it is ready to be taken to the nomination process? And if not fully ready is it near ready? I do know that I have to translate the sources into English, before taking it to the nomination process. ^~Moon~月と暁^~Sunrise~ 20:34, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. ^~Moon~月と暁^~Sunrise~ 13:58, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I won't template you with my Easter greeting, but honestly, what would it take for us to get along or agree to disagree? I have drastically cut back on AFDs, I conciously try to support more admin candidates than not, I have tried other things like DYKs. To just be open, I at times don't know what more people want for me or what would really be fairly asked for. Is there something we can work on together that we can bring to DYK status to ease tensions? If you just don't want me to comment to you okay, assuming you do the same for me, but I really after all this time just wish we could either agree to disagree or find some way to come together peacefully. I have had pleasant interactions with Collectonian, Randomran, Stifle, etc., I don't see why things between us should be different. Please be open to something mutually acceptable. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 07:19, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Dabomb87 (talk) 01:18, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After seeing your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chronology of the Harry Potter series, I was wondering if you were interested in joining the deletion discussion for Chronology of Star Wars, an article which has been nominated for the same reasons. Thanks, Dalejenkins | 07:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for your participation in my recent Request for adminship. I've seen you around a million times, and I'm sure we've worked together on something but I just can't remember what. :) Oh well, let me throw a couple things at you and see what sticks!

We've been productive on the D&D project with few editors and probably few articles with enough potential, but our GA drive there has netted Gary Gygax, Wizards of the Coast, Dragons of Despair, Drizzt Do'Urden, Forgotten Realms, Tomb of Horrors, Dwellers of the Forbidden City, White Plume Mountain, The Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth, Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, Planescape: Torment, Dragonlance, and Against the Giants.

Likewise on the comics GA drive, we've got Spider-Man, Spider-Man: One More Day, Silver Age of Comic Books, Alex Raymond, Winnie Winkle, LGBT themes in comics, Hergé, and Pride & Joy (comics) promoted. If interested or curious, come check it out, otherwise happy editing! :) BOZ (talk) 02:55, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deal. Although you have to remember that seperate noms would be just as big of a pain in the ass. Would you mind taking a look at my rough draft for the coming week's dispatch here? If possible, could you chip in a few things about FLRC? Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:38, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. It wasn't that bad. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:51, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the list review process is seriously flawed and should be rethought. My experience, after now having a featured article and a featured list delisted is that I am totally uninspired to ever put any more effort into creating or maintaining featured lists and articles. The process is counter to the spirit of cooperation, and to incremental improvements that are an inherent part of the wiki process. Delisting the list of longest suspension bridge spans is pointless. It is way better than it was when it was first featured, and has become THE BEST source of this information on the internet, if not the entire planet. I addressed all the serious problems with the list, and what is left to improve is very minor if not a matter of taste. This process is helping make Wikipedia a very unfriendly, uncooperative, rigid minded place. -- ☑ SamuelWantman 23:53, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are missing the point. You may have been following "the process", but it is the process itself that is defective. Can you really not understand what I am getting at? -- ☑ SamuelWantman 09:38, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hey there, thanks for the work on the D Gray Man episode list. I was wondering if it would be possible to point out the filler episodes on the main page ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.159.183 (talk) 19:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother, but here there is a link to a similar discussion: Talk:List of Naruto: Shippuden episodes#"Filler" episodes.Tintor2 (talk) 19:20, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I randomly decided to check around the wiki a bit today, and I'd like to give you a hearty pat on the back for getting the Bleach seasons to FT. Enjoy. --erachima talk 06:09, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The BarnSakura
		I, erachima, hereby award you the BarnSakura for your work in creating the Bleach seasons featured topic. Good luck maintaining it for the next ten seasons!

Shoboi's a weird case. It's not an official site, but rather a site which compiles anime airdates from tv guides. So it's as reliable as those tv guides are. The tricky bit, however, is that it does accept a certain amount of user-generated content: there is a wiki section, which is not the same as the main site (similar to ANN's wiki content) and they accept corrections from users to the main site as well (for when the TV guides are not accurate or the schedules change or what have you). However, those changes are not done directly by the users, but rather submitted (with sources) by the users and then checked and implemented by the administrators.

I would say it's reliable, though, because WP:RSE specifically mentions the case of "An Internet forum with identifiable, expert and credible moderators with a declared corrective moderation policy may, exceptionally, be considered reliable for some topics. In this sense, where moderators act as editors to review material and challenge or correct any factual errors, they could have an adequate level of integrity. This exception would only be appropriate to fields that are not well covered by print sources, where experts traditionally publish online." which basically describes how Shoboi works. It also meets the "best source available" criteria imo. --erachima talk 09:32, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]