Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:54, 12 October 2007

Template:TrollWarning

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15
How to archive a talk page

RE:Dr. Slump

Kemono is not a genre of fiction to begin with. It's a genre of character design. If you want to mention there being lots of kemono characters in the article text, that's good, but the only pages that should have kemono as a genre are pages on paintings and the like.

Even if it turns out that the kemono article is wrong and it is used to describe fiction, the only pages I'd think would need it as one of their primary genres would be stuff like +Anima, where man-beastman interactions are the primary theme of the work. --tjstrf talk 07:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hehe, sorry how my answer is always NO. Our genre system is an unholy mess right now though, so adding anything unnecessary to it is not going to help.

And yes, +Anima is quite good. Very nice art, good concept and characters, but mysteriously canceled just as the plot was starting to pick up. So be warned that it's going to drop you literally midscene at the end. (The last page has the characters being attacked by a bear with "TO BE CONTINUED" at the bottom. It never was continued.) --tjstrf talk 07:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, we're in luck! It was uncancelled and completed at volume 10. No clue on the site, since the scanlation group dropped the title after volume 7. I'll e-mail you if I find one. --tjstrf talk 19:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

666 Satan & Naruto

i have a long response you'll be gettin as soon as i get home (im in class right now and multi tasking just isnt really workin for me at the moment:P), but im curious as to what your question(if there is one) or if its just a comment... Ancientanubis, talk Editor Review 17:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

ya, well with the whole 666 Satan thing, the reason i edit so much is i brought it from a small unorganized article to what it is today mostly on my own/with the help of a few people...

and on the topic of similarities, well i never specifically stated that it was only naruto and dbz that influenced 666 Satan, but it has been mentioned in various volumes of naruto (and i also believe 666 Satan, or possibly the other way around, idk) on the back cover where they have writers notes, that dbz influenced a lot of "me and my brothers drawings" and i understand that in the world of art, that influence can come from all over the place (i know this from personal experience as an artist) so i have no doubt that he may have gained influence from various other mangas/artists over the years

but to answer what i think you were possibly hinting at (the fact that the similarities section only has similarities to dbz and similarities to naruto is that dbz bein the stated one in w/e volumes those comments were found in, and the naruto part because of the fact that its his brother who does the series, and to be completely honest we (founding members) have not removed it is that its important enough to note, yet also not just get a passing mention, but my main reason for removing things like the yu-gi-oh comment is that small passing coincidents like that dont seem to merit a section, and i felt like it was one of those things that was like "this series has a tournament in it just as (insert some random series that a tournament)"... did that answer your question though??? Ancientanubis, talk Editor Review 18:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

no problem, drop me a line if ya ever are curious about somethin or just need some help with w/e... im eager to help (either work or advice or just w/e) and... ya, peace... Ancientanubis, talk Editor Review 19:14, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Cruft Conspricy

Lets hope its not a case of mutiple Prince Zarbon sockpuppeting and just a few users making new user mistakes. If not than we might be in some trouble. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 19:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I've already got rid of the Plot summaries on most of the articles, though no one has replaced it with anything suitible. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 19:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Anyway Vegeta however is doing pretty good right now, all it needs are some references. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 19:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: no userfied interwikis

While I agree with your removal of FU images and categories, there's no reason to comment out the interwiki links as well. They are a strictly one-way link (meaning that you couldn't stumble upon User:TimySmidge/Son Goten from ja:孫悟天 just because the former links to the later), and there's no policy or guideline saying that they need to remain off of articles being developed in userspace. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Buu

This disambiguation page is absolutely in line with WP standards - I'm really not sure what you're attempting to do with your formatting changes, but they were unnecessary. Deiz talk 02:25, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Astro Boy's gender

Are you referring to the fact that Astro's a robot and therefore has no gender? I don't know, to me he's a "boy" robot. He even has a robot "sister", so robots in Tezuka's world may have a gender.

Also, Astro is categorized as a child superhero. Again, to me he's a "boy" so I think it applies.--Nohansen 04:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Shapeshifters

A very good point. I've initiated a discussion at Category talk:Fictional shapeshifters to see if we can create a more precise definition than what's there. Good call. --Tenebrae 14:46, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

re:Shapeshifter category vagueness

I think the Tenebrae is looking for a bit more input on the cat's talk page before anyone unilaterally adds/changes the cat's criteria. It may be best for you to chip in your thoughts there and see if anyone else has something to add. (And yes, I did notice that the discussion was kicked off between you and Tenebrae on you respective talk pages.)

I'd also give the discussion at least a week, or neutrally cross post to the relevant project talk pages to let more editors know that a discussion is happening. - J Greb 06:25, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Dragon Ball

Looks like you did fine on your own. I would love to help out with DBZ articles, but I have a lot of real-world stuff going on right now so I can't. You can see Portal:Naruto isn't even updated very often; I was really hoping that someone else would take an interest in actively editing the portal but that hasn't happened. Maybe I'll get back to editing it when I have more free time. In the meantime, I can only give you a few suggestions:

1. Remember a portal is primarily for readers, not editors, so think off things that you would want to see as a regular user.
2. The most vital part of a portal is NEWS so always keep it updated!
3. You can encourage users to have casual conversations in the Talk Page of the portal. I think it's OK to have that; we have a regional noticeboard for Philippines-related articles at WT:TAMBAY, and a lot of the conversations there are not necessarily related to improving articles.
4. When you're ready to show it off to the world, you may want to add it to Portal:List of portals.

That's it for now. Good Luck — Sandtiger 11:46, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Look

I just want you to know that my dad is not User:Peter Vogel. Please look at this. My dad cleary wrote this. P.S. I am not Peter Vogel either. --TimySmidge Jr. 18:41, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Peter Vogel???

Sorry to disappoint you but I am not Peter Vogel. Never have been and never will be. The evidence you provide of me being him is poor at best. I appologized about the things I said on Project Dragon Ball talk page. This is a very immature way to get back at me.

This edit was made by the one AND ONLY--Lucky Mitch 19:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Is there anything I can do to prove I am not Peter Vogel? The sign calling me a "sockpuppet" on my user page has become very annoying and I feel insulted everytime I see it, but at the same time I don't want to remove it because if I do you will most likely see this as incriminating. Please respond as soon as possible.--Lucky Mitch 03:21, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I apologize for the rude "your majesty" comment I made earlier. I have just looked at Peter Vogel's edits and have noticed how serious of a problem this really is. I would just like to add that I was in favor of the shortening of the plots and getting rid of all the "cruft", the thing that I was most trying to defend on this page was mainly the transformations sections of each character as well as the English names. However I have long since gotten over all of that. Peter Vogel's edits are mostly excessive, poorly written, and redundant. I am all for getting rid of this "cruft" as it is called.--Lucky Mitch 05:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

CFD nomination

I've transferred the discussion of Category:Wikipedians who like Inu Yasha to the speedy renaming section of Misplaced Pages:User categories for discussion, since that forum discusses user-related categories and WP:CFD doesn't. You're not the first, don't worry! Regards, Bencherlite 23:14, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Google Gulp

Re this edit: can you explain to me why (as your edit summary implies) Misplaced Pages:Categorizing redirects requires this deletion? It seems to me that that guideline only purports to give examples of useful categorizations, not an exhaustive list. This categorization is useful because it enables someone browsing Category:Fictional drinks to find Google Gulp, which is a fictional drink. —Blotwell 05:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

motorola 68000

Hi, you put motorola 68000 in WikiProject Hong Kong. Why? I just took it out. Potatoswatter 03:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Doki

It's all in the name: Doki means angry demons. Not much of a stretch to assume they are what they're named. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 06:02, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Batman

Yeah, I don't want to cause a problem; sorry about that. It's been discussed on the WikiProject Comics talk page (I don't want to trawl through the talk page archives, but I will if you want) before that even though an article is about a superhero it isn't self-evident that it's about a fictional character. Both you and I know there's no such thing in real life (still there's always a chance someone could put on a costume and run around breaking legs . . .) but Misplaced Pages articles are written for a general audience. In spite of the character's global ubiquity, we can't necessarily assume when introducing Batman in the first paragraph of the article that the reader knows who Batman is, much less that he is a superhero or a fictional character. Thus the word "fictional' should be there from the outset. As for the body of the article, note the section in the Exemplars titled "Fictional character biography". It says, "The biography of the character. Filling in the first (or primary, if the 'main' version isn't the original) continuity version of the character's history. Note that such a biography should assert the character's fictionality in their biography and should not be written in a manner that asserts that the events happened themselves". There have been several discussions on the talk page that the inclusion of the word "fictional" in the header is more or less mandatory in comics articles.

Of course, there's the simple fact that Wiki guidelines are just that: guidelines. We are encourgaged to ignore guidelines if they interfer with the composition of a well-written article (see WP:IAR). However, in this case I see no reason to ignore the guidelines. As someone who's worked on a number of FA articles, it's become apparent that (at least in the lead) you don't want to assume that a reader has a basic familiarity with the subject. After all, the lead, and particularly the first sentence, is meant to be simple distillation of what the article is about and why it matters. WesleyDodds 22:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I've found one discussion: WesleyDodds 23:01, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Here's a discussion about fictional aliens (as far as we know, all aliens are fictional, but it mentions the need to mention that they are fictional): WesleyDodds 23:05, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Two more: , WesleyDodds 23:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

The Notorious B.I.G.

Hi Sesshomaru, I partially reverted this edit you made because of manual of style corrections. Here's a couple of reasons why I changed the edit:

• Words like "rapper" don't need to be linked to "rapping" (per WP:R#Do not change links to redirects that are not broken).
• Albums are always italicised (per WP:ITALICS).
• Faith Evans doesn't need to be wikilinked because it's already linked in the same section (per WP:OVERLINK).
• Although true, words like "tragedy" in the heading implies pov.

Apologies for the rant, but I'm just letting you know where I'm coming from. Thanks. Spellcast 06:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Can you specify which wikilinks you're referring to? I don't think low value items like "album" really need to be wikilinked. And the "Murdered hip hop musicians" category does seem kind of redundant to "Murdered rappers" (you can take it to WP:CFD if you wish). But then again, some hip hop musicians like DJs aren't necessarily rappers. Spellcast 22:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

The murdered rappers category can probably be merged into murdered hip hop musicians. There's only 3 non-rappers in murdered hip hop musicians. I'd support a merge if you took it to CfD. And with the wikilinks, linking unbroken redirects is explicitly forbidden in WP:R#Do not change links to redirects that are not broken. I'm looking through the featured articles of musicians and actors and I hardly ever see "film" or "albums" linked. It provides no additional information from the text, whereas linking albums like Ready to Die certainly does. Spellcast 23:05, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Responses

Someone accused me of being sockpuppet of you? Thats insane! We used to argue like crazy, and our acounts were created at completely differn't times. Sorry about the Freeza's mother buisness I was reverting back some other things and I thought I was reverting that instead of adding it back, I did not actually add it. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 21:08, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Over the Hedge (Nintendo DS)

I've been trying to have this page redirected to Over the Hedge (video game) ever since you attempted that, see this history page and the discussion one. The problem is that A Link to the Past (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) is trying to keep it for what I see as not a good enough reason. I told him in my edit summary that it didn't need its own article and although it is slightly different, it could easily be mentioned in Over the Hedge (video game). What to do? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Well you are right, it is the same game, and doesnt deserve its own page, hence the reason i moved it. many games have different developers and slightly different features and mentioning this on your page is enough, well thats what i belive. Im gonna revert his edit now. but if he keeps on doing this go to wikiproject CVG and ask them on the talk page. Otherwise you could always put his page up for deletion and let the admins decide.

A good example of different features is Marvel: Ultimate Alliance, where there are seperate characters for the Game Boy Advance. Hoped this helped, ill go revert his edit now. Salavat 03:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

If there was notible difference between games the nintendo Ds version would of had a different title such as "Over the Hedge DS". Salavat 03:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I already gave him a three-revert warning in that if he does it again he's blocked. I've been considering taking it to WP:AFD, however. Let me finish up a few other things and I'll settle this case. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Good work. seems like he is just trying to protect his creation. just make sure he doesnt revert the redirect again and we are all good. Salavat 03:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

A Link to the Past is getting really worked up about this i think the page should be deleted as he seems not to want a merge. if you dont want to tag it for deletion i will , as for now im going offline for a couple of hours, hope you can resolve the issue. 05:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salavat (talk • contribs)

you're an ass.

I reinstituted the technical change YOU made, but reorked it to get the text from the version you did NOT like, and now you want to change it again by questioning my edit, which reinstituted the very thing YOU were trying to get on the page? You're an unmitigated ass. This is petty harrassment for my supporting others over you. ThuranX 11:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)