Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:47, 1 March 2009

User:Collectonian/talkheader

Comodo Firewall Pro

Hi, I'm not good with tables, so can you fix the article Comodo Firewall Pro's table? I'm not sure if it's suppose to be using a table also since I never worked on a computer program article. DragonZero (talk) 06:33, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

It really shouldn't be a table, nor should every minor version be noted. A paragraph or two of prose giving its major version history would be preferred. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 14:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I'm wondering if this page should be requested for protection Naruto: Clash of Ninja (series). Apparently, people like to change the tables and add false information about release dates, change the name of Naruto Shippuden: Gekito Ninja Taisen! EX to Naruto revolution 3. Mostly it's the table that I see vandalised mostly. It seems the vandalism has begun since December and is still going on. DragonZero (talk) 07:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm...you can try, but I suspect that because it isn't happening every day, the request would be denied. Are editors having trouble keeping up with them? -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Not really, but I have to do long chains of undos at times. DragonZero (talk) 20:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I'm not good with tables, and this will be alot of work, but can you fuse the dates to a table already made on the articles that have been expected to be merged? If my words are confusing, seeing the article will make more sense. Japanese Beyblade DVD. Thanks. DragonZero (talk) 00:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm...I'm not fully getting the question. That article needs axing though....ewwww....With that many volumes, I'm thinking just do prose summary rather than tables at all. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:26, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

What about the article MegaVideo? Eversince it installed the time limit, many people have been angry and posting ways to get past it or other sites to use instead of it. DragonZero (talk) 05:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Blech...tagged it for CSD as it doesn't appear to be a notable site. Back on the 5th/6th, it probably could have been protected as well, but seems to have calmed now and its mostly just one IP, so probably better to just report them for blocking if they come back. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:10, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Love Hina

Two points really. Fullmetal Alchemist (GA) has a section for merchandise. Normally I'd not refer to other articles as a reason for keeping something, but aside from having a lot of information to go in that section (thanks to using some of it in a character sandbox, I have most of the references handy), a GA is hard to ignore. There are others too

Kanon (also GA) has a "Music" section rather then "Soundtrack" section, and WP:MOS-AM doesn't dictate a suggestion for proper naming, merely suggests it under other media (should possibly be clarified). I personally chose to rename it due to the semantics (Soundtrack implies music used during the game/show/whatever, whereas Love Hina has a lot of music not used in the show itself), plus I was planning to expand it, which would take the meaning away from "soundtrack" even more. Also some of the cds have drama tracks, so it would have been renamed again anyway (I can't justify a seperate section for drama, so either "Music and Drama' or "Soundtrack and Drama" possibly).

Music, well I would prefer it be "music", but not to the point where I'm going to make a fuss (thats the day I need shooting). Merchandise just seems a sensible thing to include, although for character articles it does come under Reception on MOS-AM. MOS-AM doesn't even mention it for series articles. (which suggests its neither expected nor to be avoided, so could probably go through discussion) Dandy Sephy (talk) 05:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

FMA is GA, not FA. Tokyo Mew Mew is FA and has no such section, nor does any other similar article. Also, FMA's section is under media and is basically an "other" section (and really isn't needed and will likely be axed if it goes for FA). Kanon is not primarily an anime/manga article, its a visual novel and generally falls more under the music guidelines than the anime/manga MoS. Also, it is again not FA, only GA. CDs would be an acceptable alternative, rather than Music as obviously drama Cds aren't music either. Or drama CDs can go under the "other" section. Personally, I don't see the point of having a merchandise section in the series article at all. It seems to encourage excessive minor details and trivial information, particularly as almost all manga and anime series have at least some kind of merchandise made for it. I think it should be discussed before trying to make it a norm. In either case, as there was no content yet, it seems pointless to even put in a separate section in Love Hina and just encourage people to come put in all kinds of stuff. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 05:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I actually hit save instead of preview, if you'd been 5-10 minutes late in editing, I'd have pasted a start from an existingsandbox. I agree that "CDs" is an acceptable compromise. If you wish, I can sandbox a merchandising section for you to decide for yourself, it's not a problem. Dandy Sephy (talk) 06:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I was looking at our current FA's for some idea of the difference between GA and FA and also some ideas for editing Love Hina, and noticed Madlax has a merchandise section. Admittedly that was passed in early 2007, but it went through a overhaul to prevent it losing FA status last year. Thoughts?

I understand the "excessive minor details", but you can see the sort of thing I mean in the reception on my WIP Naru sandbox on the bottom of my user page: a generic comment about lots of merchandise, with a trio of official refs, and then the only merchandise with any real notability outside Japan, sourced from a very reliable source. The only difference is it will cover all 6. If you remain unconvinced, fair enough, we've both got article quality in mind Dandy Sephy (talk) 18:26, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to see your sandboxed version id (sorry I didn't reply sooner...going a bit sideways this week LOL). The more I think about it, the more I can see both sides...TV does include a merchandise section in its articles after all, I just want to avoid people going crazy on listing every keychain, figurine, etc (we know how the fans get ;-) ). -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 19:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

You can just see the reception section on the last sandbox on my user page (for stupid reasons I dont want to post my sandboxes on other pages - yes I know people can do it the hard way :p) - the difference won't be massive, just include 3 more examples. I did think about the random keychains etc, but the 3 refs nicely prove they exist and you can easily summarise random stuff like that in 1-3 sentances. Love Hina doesn't suffer from crap being added (since I removed all the OR all those months ago), just the odd vandalism (most of that should stop after the removal of the short character list) Dandy Sephy (talk) 19:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Cool...I'll hunt it down later this evening. I've actually noticed that it seems to be something of a trend. Lower quality articles seem more inclined to be vandalized than ones that are either being actively improved or are already GA/FA/FL level. I wonder if anyone has done any kind of studies on that... ~wanders off on a tangent~ -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 19:24, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

You may have a point there, in fact I've often been puzzled that certain pages managed to reach B or GA without being destroyed through vanadalism. Every Naruto page in those ranges for example. It helps a lot of editors are likely to be keeping a close eye and insta-revert much of it Dandy Sephy (talk) 19:26, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

On a related note, aside from the lead and plot (the plot is being done as I reread the series for the first time in years, along with some related articles. The lead will be the last thing), how do you think the rest of the article is doing? I can double the size of the soundtrack/albums/music/cds section (might be worth rediscussing once I've done the expansion, "cd's" still doesn't fit) Dandy Sephy (talk) 04:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

*bump* Sorry to pester you, but I know how quickly stuff vanishes to archives given the size of your talk page. Did you ever take a look at the sandbox? Dandy Sephy (talk) 22:00, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Woops, I forgot...been a rough week. Will try to get a look at it tonight. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 23:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay, for a character article, that looks fine :) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:13, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Sam Fuller

Thanks for reminding me about the articles you have. Feel free to get in touch by email so that we can move ahead. Sam Fuller is in pretty bad shape. Have you seen it? Stetsonharry (talk) 15:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Will do this evening (I have the PDFs on my home comp). And yeah, it is...I have it on my watch list but I'm just not into biographies at all, so mostly just watching to revert any vandalism and try to help with small things like MoS issues or discussions. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Blood: The Last Vampire, Live Action

Sorry for not supporting my edits recently - I've got a starting reference and once the full publicity of the UK premiere hits I'll update the link to point in the right direction. And sorry if this not the right place to say hello. Cowfish (talk) 21:49, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I don't think a Twitter feed meets RS, though, so if there isn't an official site or the like with it, might be better to wait to another source is available to confirm it. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

The Twitter feed is currently the main news outlet for the festival, as the official site is still waiting on the full programme before release. *I* know it's reliable, but I agree that Twitter doesn't really meet RS :). I'll keep poking the people who publish such things to get their acts together and put out an official source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cowfish (talk • contribs) 23:58, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Since its pretty obvious now its true, and that article isn't a GA nor FA, I put in a shorter version of your comment without the source for now. One can be added later when its confirmed on the official site or press release. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

The Manzai Comics

There, that's better. Anyhow I'm looking for more sources - I can tell it's widely published, but I'll see if any Japanese sources mention it. WhisperToMe (talk) 06:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I've CSDed it as it was properly deleted in a very recent AfD. I don't understand why you would even recreated it when it was deleted just last month, when the recreated article is no different from the deleted one. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 06:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm trying to make it different. As for Atsuko Asano http://mainichi.jp/life/today/news/20090210org00m100011000c.html?link_id=TT004 she may have won a prize from Shogakukan (if what Google translator is saying is true) WhisperToMe (talk) 07:00, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

It still isn't notable per Misplaced Pages guidelines, hence its being deleted in the AfD. There is no verifiable notability. For Asano, from other recent manga-ka AfDs, that would not make her notable because those publishers literally give out dozens of those every year as part of their "try to find new artists to work for them." They generally aren't significant nor major awards at all. Without knowing specifically what award it is, its hard to say. Either way, though, that alone does not make her notable enough for an article.-- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 07:03, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Asano's not that recent of an author. http://www.jbby.org/en/books/s16_Battery.html - This says she received Noma Prize for Juvenile Literature in 1997 for Battery. Now, this source also says "Japanese Association for Writer for Children" honored her for Battery 2, but I'd have to dig more into that. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:06, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

That speaks to Battery's notability, again, not her own. See WP:CREATIVE. She does not meet any of those criteria. The novels winning awards might make them notable, but not their writer. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 07:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

• 1. WP:CREATIVE says that one can be notable if "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." - So does this mean I should search Japanese newspapers for reviews of this book? WhisperToMe (talk) 07:21, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Speaking of which, Battery is a film. I dunno how long it is, but if it's feature length that too would support the criteria. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
• 2. As for the Manzai Comics series, what I'm trying to figure out is this: http://journal.mycom.co.jp/column/ebook/077/ - is this a person's blog or if it is a column from a respected publication about the Manzai Comics series. If it's the latter this can save the article. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:21, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Being adapted into is not the same as being the subject of. And that is a blog from the looks of it. The article has already been deleted, and one column does not meet WP:BK. It needs significant coverage, as in multiple full reviews. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 07:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 07:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes staff members of websites have blog-like pages, but because the people writing them are staff members of a newspaper or another RS, and the blog is hosted on the newspaper/RS website (so therefore the blog entry is a publication of that paper/RS) then it does not count as a blog. That's what I'm trying to determine. WhisperToMe (talk) 08:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Emure

Emure is a city in Nigeria, it is in the Ekiti State, it is not the Ekiti State so stop changing it to the Ekiti State.--Chicagobearz (talk) 02:59, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

It is neither notable, nor does it need two articles. Stop calling valid edits vandalism. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:25, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Bob Ross

Just FYI, I reverted your edit here on the Bob Ross article. The entry was not vandalism and contained a citation. It just needed to be cleaned up a bit. I also added an additional citation. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 08:04, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

And I have removed it again. The entry was vandalism as the guy was spamming his forums here, nor is the entry appropriate nor relevant to a biography. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 14:04, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Hikaru no Go

Would you suggest tagging this one with {{article issues}}? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:34, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

"cleanup", "refimprove", "or", "plot", "prose" (that voice list needs to go), and I'd add a merge for the media list back to the main (inappropriate split per project consensus). What is with that silly Go box? I'd so take that out. Eww. I's also tag for "external links" (needs cleaning) "and intro-rewrite". Oh, that series box at the bottom should probably also go...looks like its broken anyway. I'd TfD it with only 3 articles. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 16:38, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Ugh... why the hell is the Hikaru navbox displaying broken like that? I cleaned it up myself (will XfD it in a sec, since I've been reminded to its existence =) ), and there's nothing in the page source that should be breaking it like that... *scratches head in confusion* 「ダイノガイ千？！」 21:27, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

BTW, the template TfD is at Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 February 27#Template:Hikaru no Go. 「ダイノガイ千？！」 17:49, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Cobra article

How does it look at my sandbox. Looks much better from the past article doesn't it? : P I was thinking about merging OVA and anime movie into the anime section to make a nice strong section, because if they were just left alone they would be one paragraph. : ( – J U M P G U R U 18:07, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

The manga section needs to be broken up into a least two paragraphs :) Other than that, looks better except still not demonstrating notability :P -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 19:12, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, yeah its not done. :P I knew I was missing something, it needed to be split in paragraphs! XD So, uh...how can it demonstrate notability...I forgets...cuz im stupd. XD – J U M P G U R U 19:45, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Multiple reviews in reliable sources or other significant coverage; awards, things like that. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 19:47, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I knew it, I knew it! It was at the top of my mind. Reviews, I think ANN has some for the movie adaptation. : ) – J U M P G U R U 20:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I put in a reception section! :D So what do you think about having the OVA and anime movie merged into the "Anime" section. Oh poo, I just noticed that the plot section is copied from ANN that I took from the main article. Grrr.... >_< – J U M P G U R U 00:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I think that's fine to have both under a single anime section since there is little information available about both. Obviously that copyvio plot needs to go :P The reception...its only one source, so doesn't show notability...also a little too much from that one source, I'd think. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I was starting to think so. : P Might need to find more reviews. Yeah, if the sections were just left alone then they'd just be like, say one paragraph long. -_- – J U M P G U R U 01:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

To survive an AfD, I'd suspect it would need at least three. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I found one from sci-fi channel, just need one more. Also, do character sections need sources?, I think so. – J U M P G U R U 02:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, they do :) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 02:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Would the IMDb user star ratings count as a third review? : P – J U M P G U R U 18:13, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

No. They are not reliable sources and shouldn't even be mentioned at all. It must be a legitimate review from a reliable source (and an actual review, not just a short commentary) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 20:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

o.o

Editing using the iPhone is hard... D: moocowsrule 00:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

ROFLOL!! I know it is!! XD I finally got an iPhone and then I tried editing and I was soooo disapointed! – J U M P G U R U 01:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

XD I think I'm gonna just like... use my regular computer. D: I don't like AT&T though.

They messed up on my iPhone, and somehow I ended up with my moms cell phone number and my mom ended up with my cell phone number so we had to take our phones back (my mom got a Samsung) and switch the numbers. moocowsrule 01:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Wow...I don't think I could even try that! Too small a screen for me :) (I just got a new cell phone too, but its a Nokia 6301 :) ) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

You can zoom in, but not that much... moocowsrule 01:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

XD I wonder if I could have an edit conflict with myself... (editing on my compy and on my iPhone XD) moocowsrule 02:04, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Reference library query

Just wondering if you've made any headway on your scanner yet? The current discussion on WT:ANIME about series being licensed in LOTE made me think of the Zetsuai 1989 series, which may be in your copy of The Anime Encyclopedia. --Malkinann (talk) 03:36, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Alas, no. I got a new power supply for my comp, but its incompatible with my older motherboard, so I'm gonna have to get a new motherboard too, which means a new CPU and memory and maybe a new hard drive, so it will be down for awhile yet. If it isn't too long, I can type it in manually, otherwise, I can probably scan it in at work. In Zetsuai's case, it as four paragraphs on it on pages 460-461. For the article...the first paragraph is plot summary, the second notes that an image video, Bronze Cathexis was released in 1994 with five popp promoses featuring Koki. Paragraph 3 is on Bronze: Zetsuai since 1989, released in 1996 and directed by Yamazaki, on Izumi's pondering of their relationship after Koji doesn't show up to see him off for his soccer tour (not realizing Koji was in a car accident). Probably the best bit would be the final paragraph:

"Based on the ongoing 1990 manga in Margaret by Minami Ozaki, Zetsuai is one of the greatest icons of shonen ai-gay erotica for a female audience. The video versions show only a tiny segment of the angst-ridden multicharacter story, and though there's not much explicit sex, there is a lot of blood—accidents and self-inflicted wounds abound. Koji and Izumi have become shonen ai's Romeo and Juliet, and a similarly tragic ending probably awaits. 'Everylasting Love' is Ozaki's preferred English title, either through deliberate irony or simply poor translation."

Hope that helps -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:58, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that does help - thank you!  :) --Malkinann (talk) 04:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Why didn't you talk to me first before the TfD?

Collectonian...you are all for the removal of the IMDb and TV.com links from the television infoboxes, yet, when I make a template to make life easier for those who are actually going to work on it, you TfD the template. Do you want those links removed from the infoboxes or not? Why are you making my work more difficult? LA If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 05:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

One has nothing to do with the other, nor is it "your work." You created an inappropriate template for your own sake (not other people's) and did so without discussion nor consensus with either project then began mass replacing existing templates for no valid reason. Whether you can remember them or not is beyond irrelevant. There are existing templates for those links which are vested, have consensus, and are the default methods to use. If you can't remember TWO simple template names (and that is ALL that the discussion even covers), then either make notes or let someone else deal with the movements when the time is right (which is not now, as there is still not clear consensus to remove the links from the infobox). -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 06:02, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Emure

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Misplaced Pages, as you did to Emure, you will be blocked from editing. --Chicagobears94 (talk) 23:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC) If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 05:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC)