| Revision as of 04:33, 13 July 2009 view sourceA Nobody (talk | contribs)53,000 edits removed harassment← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:40, 13 July 2009 view source Matthewedwards (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users26,824 edits →Jazz Curtis: replyNext edit → | ||
| Line 137: | Line 137: | ||
| ::::] is up for deletion. I've listed a few sources that can be used as references in the AfD, but haven't inserted them into the article. Same for a '']'' character, ]. I've mentioned some possible sources in that one's AfD. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">] : ] </span></small> 20:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC) | ::::] is up for deletion. I've listed a few sources that can be used as references in the AfD, but haven't inserted them into the article. Same for a '']'' character, ]. I've mentioned some possible sources in that one's AfD. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">] : ] </span></small> 20:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :::::I some to Sally's article. Even though I suppose I disagreed with you and Orderinchaos in your AfD nomination, I am pleased that we have been able to work together on these since then. I suppose my concern is really what we're seeing with this latest flush of nominations, i.e. totally indiscriminate and by accounts not adhering to ] or ] in manner, but rather using little more than absurd ] or ] "arguments". I can handle disagreeing with editors who at least know what they are talking about and are willing to improve content as well, it's the indiscriminate approach that tends to bother me. After all at the main character list talk page, I myself am not defending all of these, i.e. some can be kept, some merged, some redirected, etc. They vary from one to the other. Sally is notable by any reasonable standard and thus does not merit the same copy and paste "cruft" "nnotable" derision given to those few that I pointed out cannot be readily verified. In any event, with regards to Bridget, should we make a separate talk page list akin to the ''Home and Away'' characters where we first determine which can be improved and work from there? It would go much better if we could first try improving them, then trying merging what we can, and only when these fail deal with AfDs, no? Best, --]<sup>'']''</sup> 02:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC) | :::::I some to Sally's article. Even though I suppose I disagreed with you and Orderinchaos in your AfD nomination, I am pleased that we have been able to work together on these since then. I suppose my concern is really what we're seeing with this latest flush of nominations, i.e. totally indiscriminate and by accounts not adhering to ] or ] in manner, but rather using little more than absurd ] or ] "arguments". I can handle disagreeing with editors who at least know what they are talking about and are willing to improve content as well, it's the indiscriminate approach that tends to bother me. After all at the main character list talk page, I myself am not defending all of these, i.e. some can be kept, some merged, some redirected, etc. They vary from one to the other. Sally is notable by any reasonable standard and thus does not merit the same copy and paste "cruft" "nnotable" derision given to those few that I pointed out cannot be readily verified. In any event, with regards to Bridget, should we make a separate talk page list akin to the ''Home and Away'' characters where we first determine which can be improved and work from there? It would go much better if we could first try improving them, then trying merging what we can, and only when these fail deal with AfDs, no? Best, --]<sup>'']''</sup> 02:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::::::We both come at things from different perspectives, but at least we can both say we're working in what we believe are the best interests of the site. I didn't nominate ''every'' article about every character in the first place. Actually, I don't know if I'm still in agreement with keeping all those listed at ], even with sources some might still be better off merged if we remove all the plot crap, but while we're working on them there really is no need to be AfDing any of them. I'm rather pissed off with ]. He can see we're working on them, but he's still gone ahead and nominated a bunch. It's far too many for a small group of editors to work on in the same 7-day period. | |||
| :::::: Opening a similar discussion at ] does need doing, its just that this particular character is at AfD right now, and we're struggling to keep up with Home and Away, before we start tackling another soap with even more characters. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">] : ] </span></small> 07:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==Hey== | ==Hey== | ||
Revision as of 07:40, 13 July 2009
 | A Nobody is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Welcome to my talk page! Please be sure to make all posts civil and constructive, as I will ignore or revert anything I deem to be bad faith, dishonest, or vandalism. For example, anyone who has ever referred to me as something other than my username or by some insulting play on my username is not welcome here, barring they apologized and made good faith amends. Also, let us try to keep two-way conversations readable. If you post to my talk page, I will just reply here. If I posted recently to another talk page, including your talk page, then that means I have it on my watchlist and will just read responses there. I may refactor discussions to your talk page for the same reason. Also, please do not refer to me here or elsewhere by my previous username as I changed names due to real-world off-wiki harassment that remains a concern. Due to the issues that caused my name change and other matters (such as the demands of college!) I may be slow in responding to messages and I may even stop editing for long stretches of time. Sincerely, --A Nobody 18:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 Archives | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
To add to this article
I am not sure what was on the previous version of the article, but the following out of universe information can be added from "Resistance 2: Getting To Know Nathan Hale," PlayStation The Official Magazine 13 (November 2008): 62: the character is voiced by David Kaye. PTOM states that "The Resistance 2 story is all about Nathan Hale and his role in this great conflict." Ted Price, one of the game developers, adds, "Internally we wanted to know more about Hale, and focusing on him provided the opportunity to answer questions about him." Thus, I encourage someone to restore the article and add this information in a manner such as this:
Nathan Hale is the protagonist of the Playstation 3 games Resistance: Fall of Man and its sequel Resistance 2. He is voiced by David Kaye.
Development
Ted Price, one of the game developers, adds, "Internally we wanted to know more about Hale, and focusing on him provided the opportunity to answer questions about him."
Biography
Hale killed practically every chimera in England and then went to America to win again.
Reception
PTOM states that "The Resistance 2 story is all about Nathan Hale and his role in this great conflict." Playstation Universe lists Hale among the top five Playstation 3 characters thus far.
References
- "Resistance 2: Getting To Know Nathan Hale," PlayStation The Official Magazine 13 (November 2008): 62.
- "Resistance 2: Getting To Know Nathan Hale," PlayStation The Official Magazine 13 (November 2008): 62.
- "Resistance 2: Getting To Know Nathan Hale," PlayStation The Official Magazine 13 (November 2008): 62.
- Dave Wales, "Top five PlayStation 3 characters thus far," Playstation Universe (March 16th, 2008): http://www.psu.com/Top-five-PlayStation-3-characters-thus-far--a0003095-p0.php
Restoration
Nathaniel is a character in Jonathan Stroud's Bartimaeus Trilogy. Nathaniel is one of the main characters of this series. After coming of age as a magician when he was 12 years old, he was granted the new name of John Mandrake, and is known by this name to everyone but the title character, Bartimaeus and in the later part of Ptolemy's Gate to Kitty.
Attributes
Appearance
In The Amulet of Samarkand he is described as being small and scrawny with dark hair. His hair, as he increases in rank, becomes increasingly long, but during the gap between The Golem's Eye and Ptolemy's Gate he has opted for a crew cut in (politically advantageous) tribute to the soldiers fighting in America. He is further described as attractive, with "the scent of power around him" and of medium height and slender build, his forehead prematurely lined (Ptolemy's Gate, U.S. Edition, pg. 21).
Personality
Nathaniel is, at first, a small, shy boy uncomfortable with anyone who is not Mrs. Underwood or Ms. Lutyens. He is very nervous and scared by Bartimaeus when he first summons the demon. As the books progress, and he becomes more and more proficient, he also becomes more confident, and possibly overconfident. He works fervently when motivated, as is shown when he furthers his education with incredible speed in The Amulet of Samarkand. Throughout the books he also shows signs of ambition to rise through the ranks of the government, a common goal among magicians. Bartimaeus compares him more than once to Simon Lovelace, as they share a similar mindset, and habitual tics, such as stroking back their hair.
Role in books
The Amulet of Samarkand
In The Amulet of Samarkand, Nathaniel starts off as a young boy who, at the age of five, had been given up by his parents to apprenticeship under a mediocre Whitehall magician named Arthur Underwood, the assistant minister of Internal Affairs. Underwood begins teaching the boy in magic, but Nathaniel, being inquisitive, decides to advance his education to higher levels without the knowledge of his tutor.
However, at the age of eleven, in his master's house, Nathaniel is publicly humiliated by a greedy and ambitious young magician named Simon Lovelace. In a fit of juvenile fury, Nathaniel hatches a plan for vengeance. He sets several mites (a weak kind of imp) on Lovelace, but Lovelace is powerful and stops the mites, then proceeds to beat Nathaniel as punishment.
Later, after much research and preparation, Nathaniel summons Bartimaeus, a 5,000-year-old djinni, to exact his revenge on Lovelace. Mrs. Underwood - Nathaniel's master's wife - inadvertently reveals Nathaniel's true name to Bartimaeus. This vastly limits Nathaniel's control over the djinni, because spells can be cast on people when their true name is known (hence the practice of assigning names).
In the end, Nathaniel earns the respect of the majority of the other magicians including Rupert Devereaux, the Prime Minister. He is accepted as a magician in the government.
The Golem's Eye
Nathaniel summons Bartimaeus again, facing off against the Resistance and sinister magicians.
The second book picks up almost three years later and features Nathaniel as a junior magician working his way up the government ranks. He is described as one of the governments' rising young stars. In this book, Kitty Jones is introduced as an important character. She is a part of the Resistance movement, which seeks to end the oppressive rule of the magicians. Nathaniel is tasked by his superiors to crush the Resistance movement and capture the members. His task is complicated when a seemingly invulnerable clay golem starts to make random attacks on London. Much to the displeasure of Bartimaeus, Nathaniel recalls the djinni to aid him in uncovering the origins of the golem, and to save his own skin.
During the course of the book Nathaniel is almost fired from his post and executed for treason. By the end of the book however he has come back to favor when Duvall's conspiracy comes to light.
Ptolemy's Gate
In Ptolemy's Gate, Nathaniel has risen to the ruling Council and is arguably the most powerful magician in the government. He stands against a force of hybrid magicians with spirits trapped inside them, led by Nouda. Romantic feelings are hinted at in the book at various points between Kitty and himself. Nathaniel summons Bartimaeus into his body to help fight the Hybrids with Gladstone's staff, and destroys most of them, leaving only Nouda alive. However, during this fight, Nathaniel is seriously injured and he loses strength quickly, even with Bartimaeus' assistance. When Nathaniel and Bartimaeus confront Nouda, Nathaniel dismisses Bartimaeus which saves Baritmaeus just prior to the staff being destroyed killing both Nouda and Nathaniel. Bartimaeus returned to the Other Place, but is known to have survived; according to his "journal", he was summoned by a female magician with a stutter afterwards. Kitty, in the end, goes visit her old friend Jakob before she begins to travel around the world in a new life.
Trivia
- Nathaniel's chosen magician name, John Mandrake, may be a reference to the popular comic strip and real life magician, Mandrake the Magician
- Nathaniel's birthday is on November 26, as confirmed by the author.
External links
References
RFA Thanks
Misplaced Pages Signpost: 29 June 2009
- News and notes: Jackson's death, new data center, more
- Misplaced Pages in the news: Google News Support, Wired editor plagiarizes Misplaced Pages, Rohde's kidnapping, Michael Jackson
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:25, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for the update! Sincerely, --A Nobody 18:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages Signpost: 6 July 2009
- News and notes: Commons grant, license change, new chapters, usability and more
- Misplaced Pages in the news: Misplaced Pages and kidnapping, new comedy series
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Food and Drink
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:05, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! Best, --A Nobody 23:01, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Jazz Curtis
Hi, A Nobody. At Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for deletion/Hugo Austin#Moved from close. you said that Jazz Curtis could have an article because of websites like this, which show that the character is verifiable in an out of universe context.
Just because the character exists and that can be verified, does it necessarily mean it deserves an article written about it? What about the character has made an impact on the real world? What makes "her" notable? There was nothing earth shattering that gave the character any watercooler moments. "She" didn't do anything spectacular in her time on the show.
Yes, the character existed. For most characters you could probably find a line or two from the actor about what the character is like, but what's the point? We'd just end up with 1000s and 1000s of pages about non notable characters. Things are already like this.
I'm not meaning to start yet another fight about this, just hear the perspective of someone who thinks the article should be kept (the AfD didn't do that; most comments there were about the AfD). Regards, Matthewedwards : Chat 22:50, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
- Nice work on the Martha McKenzie article, by the way.
- Thanks. Anyway, I, as does a whole category of editors, reject subjective/elitist concepts like "notability" as a valid criteria for inclusion on a paperless encyclopedia per User:A Nobody/Inclusion guidelines. What matters is that we can write an article that is of interest to our readers and factually accurate. Thus, we can have a small lead that acknowledges who played her and on what show, followed by a brief plot summary, and then some information on development and production using such sources as the interview that provide out of universe context on the character, finally some reception using previews/reviews of the show. So long as we can do that, i.e. have some balance of in and out of universe information, then I would much rather err on the side of featuring information that is relevant to some segment of our readers (potential editors, donors, etc. as well) than remove it altogether thereby benefitting no one. After all, we have many articles that mean nothing really to me, but could mean all the world to someone else (who knows, maybe some viewers are inspired, relate to the character etc.) and as such, I am far more concerned about those readers than my own personal feelings (I actually am not that big of a fan of soap operas, although I have a larger interest in popular culture in Western Civilization, which is why I study and read on these topics). In any event, I cannot imagine any reason why at worst we would not want to first exhaust all possible avenues of improving or merging or redirecting the content. Or at least keeping it available for the purposes of a Wiki on Home and Away. If someone made such a Wiki, I would gladly serve as an importer and import the revision histories of all those articles at least to such a site as I have done on some of the other wikis I am an admin on with regards to articles of use on them. Best, --A Nobody 23:01, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
- I understand what you're saying somewhat, and I don't totally disagree with it. I'm in no way a deletionist, it's just that with fictional elements I think that they should have some sort of impact on the real world other than just existing. I'm not sure that the fact that the character may have impressed upon someone, inspired them to behave a certain way or do a certain thing, makes it encyclopedic, not if we can't find anything reliable to verify it at least.
- At this stage, regardless of how flawed the AfD was, it has got people discussing the articles and what to do with them. I'm not actually holding out much hope for the majority of them, but since there are people including yourself who want to see what material can be found for the characters, I won't begin any individual AfDs yet. I'm also going to look for anything. You're right about exhausting all avenues, and if material can be found, that's great. Matthewedwards : Chat 06:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- If you want to make a list of all the characters from the show somewhere in my userspace in say alphabetical order, I will go through trying to source all of them and will make a note after each one whether or not I could source it. Sincerely, --A Nobody 16:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- Sally Fletcher is up for deletion. I've listed a few sources that can be used as references in the AfD, but haven't inserted them into the article. Same for a Neighbours character, Bridget Napier. I've mentioned some possible sources in that one's AfD. Matthewedwards : Chat 20:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- I added some to Sally's article. Even though I suppose I disagreed with you and Orderinchaos in your AfD nomination, I am pleased that we have been able to work together on these since then. I suppose my concern is really what we're seeing with this latest flush of nominations, i.e. totally indiscriminate and by accounts not adhering to WP:BEFORE or WP:PRESERVE in manner, but rather using little more than absurd WP:ITSCRUFT or WP:JNN "arguments". I can handle disagreeing with editors who at least know what they are talking about and are willing to improve content as well, it's the indiscriminate approach that tends to bother me. After all at the main character list talk page, I myself am not defending all of these, i.e. some can be kept, some merged, some redirected, etc. They vary from one to the other. Sally is notable by any reasonable standard and thus does not merit the same copy and paste "cruft" "nnotable" derision given to those few that I pointed out cannot be readily verified. In any event, with regards to Bridget, should we make a separate talk page list akin to the Home and Away characters where we first determine which can be improved and work from there? It would go much better if we could first try improving them, then trying merging what we can, and only when these fail deal with AfDs, no? Best, --A Nobody 02:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- We both come at things from different perspectives, but at least we can both say we're working in what we believe are the best interests of the site. I didn't nominate every article about every character in the first place. Actually, I don't know if I'm still in agreement with keeping all those listed at Talk:List of Home and Away characters#Characters for who sources do exist, i.e a user has made a search, but just has not yet added them to the article, even with sources some might still be better off merged if we remove all the plot crap, but while we're working on them there really is no need to be AfDing any of them. I'm rather pissed off with User:Jack Merridew. He can see we're working on them, but he's still gone ahead and nominated a bunch. It's far too many for a small group of editors to work on in the same 7-day period.
- Opening a similar discussion at Talk:List of Neighbours characters does need doing, its just that this particular character is at AfD right now, and we're struggling to keep up with Home and Away, before we start tackling another soap with even more characters. Matthewedwards : Chat 07:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- I added some to Sally's article. Even though I suppose I disagreed with you and Orderinchaos in your AfD nomination, I am pleased that we have been able to work together on these since then. I suppose my concern is really what we're seeing with this latest flush of nominations, i.e. totally indiscriminate and by accounts not adhering to WP:BEFORE or WP:PRESERVE in manner, but rather using little more than absurd WP:ITSCRUFT or WP:JNN "arguments". I can handle disagreeing with editors who at least know what they are talking about and are willing to improve content as well, it's the indiscriminate approach that tends to bother me. After all at the main character list talk page, I myself am not defending all of these, i.e. some can be kept, some merged, some redirected, etc. They vary from one to the other. Sally is notable by any reasonable standard and thus does not merit the same copy and paste "cruft" "nnotable" derision given to those few that I pointed out cannot be readily verified. In any event, with regards to Bridget, should we make a separate talk page list akin to the Home and Away characters where we first determine which can be improved and work from there? It would go much better if we could first try improving them, then trying merging what we can, and only when these fail deal with AfDs, no? Best, --A Nobody 02:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. Anyway, I, as does a whole category of editors, reject subjective/elitist concepts like "notability" as a valid criteria for inclusion on a paperless encyclopedia per User:A Nobody/Inclusion guidelines. What matters is that we can write an article that is of interest to our readers and factually accurate. Thus, we can have a small lead that acknowledges who played her and on what show, followed by a brief plot summary, and then some information on development and production using such sources as the interview that provide out of universe context on the character, finally some reception using previews/reviews of the show. So long as we can do that, i.e. have some balance of in and out of universe information, then I would much rather err on the side of featuring information that is relevant to some segment of our readers (potential editors, donors, etc. as well) than remove it altogether thereby benefitting no one. After all, we have many articles that mean nothing really to me, but could mean all the world to someone else (who knows, maybe some viewers are inspired, relate to the character etc.) and as such, I am far more concerned about those readers than my own personal feelings (I actually am not that big of a fan of soap operas, although I have a larger interest in popular culture in Western Civilization, which is why I study and read on these topics). In any event, I cannot imagine any reason why at worst we would not want to first exhaust all possible avenues of improving or merging or redirecting the content. Or at least keeping it available for the purposes of a Wiki on Home and Away. If someone made such a Wiki, I would gladly serve as an importer and import the revision histories of all those articles at least to such a site as I have done on some of the other wikis I am an admin on with regards to articles of use on them. Best, --A Nobody 23:01, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey
Hey, I was wondering if I could ask you a question. Spinach Monster (talk) 07:40, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- Of course you can. Best, --A Nobody 16:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. Do you have an e-mail account where we can talk? Spinach Monster (talk) 17:55, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yes. Just wiki email me, using Special:email. Sincerely, --A Nobody 17:57, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. Do you have an e-mail account where we can talk? Spinach Monster (talk) 17:55, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
I can't talk to you through Misplaced Pages's servers. Do you have an e-mail address I can talk to you at? Spinach Monster (talk) 06:22, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- You can use Special:EmailUser/A_Nobody. Sincerely, --A Nobody 16:27, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- And I thought I could trust you...Spinach Monster (talk) 03:01, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- If you send me an email, I will gladly respond, again, my email is wikipedianobody@yahoo.com. Best, --A Nobody 03:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- And I thought I could trust you...Spinach Monster (talk) 03:01, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Home and Away Wiki
I read your comment on Talk:List of Home and Away characters about setting up a Home and Away Wiki and how you'd serve as admin. If you need someone to put in an official request and nothing else, I'd be happy to do it. But while I'd be happy to contribute, setting up, running or keeping such a site in order is a bit beyond both my free time and by abilities. I would be willing to discuss it further though. Skteosk (talk) 21:05, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, if you would be willing to make the official request, I would be glad to serve as an administrator or importer. Best, --A Nobody 02:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
rescue template
Do you really think Gerfnit is rescuable? A character in a self-published novel? Don't waste the impact of the template on such as this. DGG (talk) 00:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, at least as a redirect to improve the novel's article if possible. If not, no big deal. Best, --A Nobody 02:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- a redirect, sure, but that's not what the template is for. It's for getting additional material in a article to save it from deletion, not getting attention at the AfD. If there's no likelihood the material will exist or will save it, there is nothing to do but try to get the redirect. We can work on only a limited number of articles, and there needs to be some triage. DGG (talk) 02:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- I hope that perhaps someone could find sources I have not found as the name seemed interesting and all; if not no big deal on this one. With it being part of the book's title it seemed that maybe something could be done with it. In any event, see Wilmette Life - NewsBank - Nov 18, 2004 Mike Pickard, The Gerfnit Chronicles. The Highland Park resident says, "I originally created the story as letters to my daughter at overnight camp, ..." Might have some out of universe context in the full article; I would like to help more here, but I feel I owe it to Matthewedwards and Orderinchaos to be focusing on those soap opera ones. Take care! Best, --A Nobody 02:25, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- One thing I've learned here is not to waste time on self-published fiction. In the last 2 years I remember one exception, that might have made it if we went by popularity but got deleted because there were no reviews; I'll have to find it again and see if there are finally reviews. I consider local papers, especially home-town papers, inadequate for proof of notability of a book, because they are indiscriminate. DGG (talk) 03:47, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- I hope that perhaps someone could find sources I have not found as the name seemed interesting and all; if not no big deal on this one. With it being part of the book's title it seemed that maybe something could be done with it. In any event, see Wilmette Life - NewsBank - Nov 18, 2004 Mike Pickard, The Gerfnit Chronicles. The Highland Park resident says, "I originally created the story as letters to my daughter at overnight camp, ..." Might have some out of universe context in the full article; I would like to help more here, but I feel I owe it to Matthewedwards and Orderinchaos to be focusing on those soap opera ones. Take care! Best, --A Nobody 02:25, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- a redirect, sure, but that's not what the template is for. It's for getting additional material in a article to save it from deletion, not getting attention at the AfD. If there's no likelihood the material will exist or will save it, there is nothing to do but try to get the redirect. We can work on only a limited number of articles, and there needs to be some triage. DGG (talk) 02:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)