Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ryulong (talk | contribs) at 05:41, 3 September 2013 (Reverted edits by Thenmark2 (talk) to last version by Ryulong). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

When I find that the conversations or issues discussed here have either ended or resolved, they will be inserted into my archives at my own discretion.—Ryūlóng

GITS

Made a new section about the organization of that page, please provide your input. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:25, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Question.

Hi Ryulong! Sorry if I'm disturbing, but since you made 889 edits here, maybe you are an expert, so let me ask you a question if you don't mind. When I was a kid (in 1989 or 1990) I used to watch a Japanese TV Show (through Hong Kong television), I'm not sure if it's related to Super Sentai, but there were 5 or 6 characters just like in Super Sentai, and robots as well. And the Ending song... it was those 5 or 6 characters who actually played that Ending Theme (they were jamming like a band), so I suppose they were a "band" too, or something like it. Oh, and the song were sang by the female character. Do you know something? I'm kind of "desperate" to watch that ending again :(, however since I don't know the name of the tv serie, it's difficult to find it on youtube. If you know something please let me know. Regards. --95.69.17.159 (talk) 23:06, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

This is a very good question. The only one I can think of that meets those requirements is Dekaranger but that came out 10 years after that time period. I'm not 100% sure what it could be, but if you take the ones listed on Super Sentai from before 1990 and plug them into YouTube you'll eventually find the one that jogs your memory.—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:33, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Usually I'm very good at searching stuff on YouTube and etc, but not in this case. That TV series probably has nothing to do with Super Sentai... but the characters had different colours too, and there were robots. Not 100% sure but sometimes the characters were inside a robot. The only sentence I remember from that Ending theme is "Memorikariii" (something like it). Sigh, I guess I will die without hearing that song again lol. --95.69.17.159 (talk) 05:23, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Maybe you might be thinking of one of the Metal Hero Series, Ganbare!! Robocon, or one of the Toei Fushigi Comedy Series.—Ryulong (琉竜) 05:27, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. :) I will keep searching. When (yes, when and nor if, just trying to be optimistic) I find it, I'll let you know. o/ --95.69.17.159 (talk) 05:42, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

HOLY CRAP, I found it!!!!!!!!!!! It is Dennou Keisatsu Cybercop. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7vNWKQ_htc ... 0:45 - "Mamorikari" (lol) ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1ZzWh19n20 ... there are more videos I guess. --95.69.17.159 (talk) 06:28, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Good :)—Ryulong (琉竜) 06:40, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Maybe I'll create the Wiki page about that actress. Is she notable enough? --95.69.67.239 (talk) 19:21, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't know.—Ryulong (琉竜) 19:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

GA on S>A>CA>C-2013-08-08T03:36:00.000Z">

i know this may sound selfish but i was wondering if i could nominate Stand Alone Complex for GA when this topic-ban is over. I've been adding alot of info to it, mainly the other media, remerged the spin off OVAs and cleaned it from the in-universe, plus on a side fixed most of the plot. The only thing i didn't do was work on the Reception. I know this sounds INCREDIBLY selfish, but i've been working on it for a really long time, and made a significant re-organization to it. if you don't agree, that is fine.Lucia Black (talk) 03:36, 8 August 2013 (UTC)A>C"> A>C">

I'm fairly certain that this violates your topic ban.—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:28, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

how? i'm not touching any of the articles relating to the topic, nor am i discussing about the topic. all i'm asking is that GA nomination could wait until the topic ban is over.Lucia Black (talk) 03:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

How does a GA nomination have anything to do with a topic ban. If it's worthy of a GA, by all means nominate it -- Tawker (talk) 03:39, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Bulbapedia links

Just strolling through and noticed you removed the Bulbapedia links at the bottom of the page of the lists, stating they are "not suitable". How did you decide this? Most of the sections are far from complete, and even if they were complete, a lot of readers would in fact be looking for information we don't provide, in which Bulbapedia can then expand on what we can't. If you are saying it isn't suitable as an external link for quality reasons, it has been discussed and the consensus was that it meets WP:ELNO's requirement of "substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors". Just wondering your thought process on this. Thanks, _Blake 03:58, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Considering that the site's users don't have the level of editorial control that we do when it comes to new Pokémon announcements I felt it was not in our best interests to retain the links at the current time with the recent CoroCoro "leaks" as usual.—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:14, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

But that's the whole point. We aren't showing this information, so we need to link to a site that does. We aren't using it as a source, and we aren't saying it's entirely reliable information. Just that it is the best place to get more information on whatever they want. I am not sure I agree with selectively timebanning the site just because there are "leaks" going on. _Blake 04:18, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Do we need to? Or do we want to?—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:20, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

It's not like removing the links will stop people from finding the news anyways. It won't stop people from wanting to add it here. You are just blocking people from the whole of the wiki because the frontpage has information you want to ignore exists. Plus, the new information really only applies to the list of new Pokemon, but you removed the link from all lists. It seems consistent, yes, but doesn't seem fair. _Blake 04:27, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Note that I don't really care that strongly about it. I just would rather the users have access to more information then most of our garbage lists provide. I also just wanted to see what your reason for removing them was, as it was against the consensus that they belong. _Blake 04:31, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

They are some of the better sources, but maybe we could just link to the official website's Pokedex stuff instead? I saw a few of those links but they were malformed or whatever and not universally applied. But to be honest, I was simply tired of dealing with Black60dragon (now blocked for a month) and I was worried he may use the other sites as reasoning to push the bad sourcing from Serebii (and all the other websites quoting Serebii) that he had done earlier when it came to Horubī, Dedenne, and Mēkuru (that one's name is going to be difficult to romanize though).—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:35, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Question

I am no longer editing pages based on Power Rangers or Super Sentai on the database. Is that fair? J4lambert (talk) 22:09, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

What? Because I reverted you?—Ryulong (琉竜) 05:21, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

email?

is there an email i could reach you?Lucia Black (talk) 03:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

The one in the side bar.—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:19, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

ive looked about a dozen times and i don't see where i could find it.Lucia Black (talk) 17:55, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Special:Emailuser—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:56, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

ok thanx. email sent.Lucia Black (talk) 19:42, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

The Phantom article...

First off, sorry about that small edit I put for Raum in the Phantom article. The main thing I want to ask you is this... how is that page looking to you? I ask because some entries for certain Phantoms are shorter than others. I'm a little put off for the quite long paragraphs of Siren and Arache that I did. So, what do you think? Do you think all info of the Phantoms should be condensed or expanded? --BrydoF1989 (talk) 08:34, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Condensed.—Ryulong (琉竜) 08:56, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Thought so. Sorry for making them too long... either I, you or someone else can reduce them to size. --BrydoF1989 (talk) 15:10, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Character list

Why haven't the list of characters been updated with entries for Yuzuru and to an extent Yamamoto yet? ~Switch On 2012~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 14:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Probably because they're not as important as Mayu. Just my guess. --BrydoF1989 (talk) 15:09, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Because I don't have time to make this shit anymore. You guys have to start updating the articles more often and then I'll clean them up according to policy. I am tired of having to update the episode lists on my own every week hours after the airing when you guys are in the US or UK or whatever and it's actually at a managable time. I have the copy-paste stuff there so everyone can do it.—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:21, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

They're pretty important at his point... Anyway, I'll write up the entries but they'll probably be not as good so I'll take you up on your offer to clean them. ~Switch On 2012~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 19:12, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Whatever. Just do what you think is best and I'll fix it later.—Ryulong (琉竜) 19:27, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Your question

I don't really see a need to do anything. If their behavior gets out of hand it would be a matter for ANI. Drmies (talk) 21:31, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:SUICIDE tho.—Ryulong (琉竜) 21:38, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

AN/I

This is to notify you about this thread on ANI in which you have been mentioned. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:52, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:26, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Journey through the Decade

Hi. Couple of questions. Is this song sung in Japanese? Does Chicago Manual make more sense than en MOSCT? Just asking.. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:01, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, although a few lines are in English because that's just how J-pop works lately. I don't know, I'm just arguing that we should match the name of the song as consistently presented.—Ryulong (琉竜) 11:31, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I've noted that on the song. Well you have no argument from me, though it's the ugly capitalization of Spanish songs which I find bizarre. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:04, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, non-Germanic languages don't capitalize anything other than the first word and proper nouns. But I find that the capitalization in Japan is often deliberate. See Life Is Show Time.—Ryulong (琉竜) 14:15, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

You don't think it's relevant to note the language of a song when the title is misleading? I think all examples of Spanish-title English-language songs and all examples of English-titled Spanish-language songs would clearly show so in lead. I can't comment on Japanese songs since I haven't listened to anything since Mayumi Itsuwa. There ought to be a language line in the infobox at least. Are you concerned about copyright on the first line of lyrics? My understanding is that a single line is not problematic. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:33, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

We say Gackt is Japanese. I don't see why it's important to note the language the song is mostly sung in or its first line.—Ryulong (琉竜) 14:35, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Only because I thought these days that a lot of Japanese (and Korean?) singers and groups have recorded songs in English, someone who is not up to date (like me) might not know which language the song was in if it had an I English title. But it's up to you, I'm not interested enough to actually edit the article. I was only drawn to it in context of supporting your RM. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:12, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

That's understandable. I just don't think adding the first line of the song is really necessary. Also I think it's categorized as a "Japanese language song" anyway. But the RM business is annoying now.—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:42, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Pages

No where does PTOPIC apply to the most popular or first material when a range of different media and subjects of the same name exist. It fails both of the major points for PTOPIC, yet you continue to not acknowledge this. Why? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:40, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

It applies to the most notable and most likely search result though, which usually coincides with most popular or first.—Ryulong (琉竜) 14:53, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

That entire statement is wrong, doubly so by intending it as the "first", and it is not the "most popular" by a large margin. By the measure of PTOPIC, the manga fails to meet the definition and your personal preference is the only thing which exists. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I will not discuss Ghost in the Shell outside of the dispute resolution page.—Ryulong (琉竜) 15:49, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Talk header clarification

Just a quick question about your Talk page header: I will revert and ignore any basic template messages used on my talk page. Does this include talkback/whisperback? If so, how would you prefer to be notified? —Frungi (talk) 00:11, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

I just mean like the uw series or whatever.—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:11, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Proposing to rename seasons of The Amazing Race

Hi! Sincerely I proposed to rename the season articles for The Amazing Race (The Amazing Race X → The Amazing Race (season X)), and it properly uses a policy of following the guidelines of WP:AT and WP:NC-TV. The move proposal in The Amazing Race 1's talk page that the move of renaming the season names were denied after gave a result of no consensus.

I shall give a permission to move and rename for the season articles in the original U.S. version of the popular franchise including international versions, in usage on Wiki standards. ApprenticeFan 08:28, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

No. Don't. The seasons are clearly referred to as "The Amazing Race X" in reliable sources.—Ryulong (琉竜) 09:04, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I can barely understand this anyway because you are clearly not a native speaker. I will not agree to moving "The Amazing Race 22" to "The Amazing Race (U.S. season 22)".—Ryulong (琉竜) 09:09, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, I looked in HaMerotz LaMillion 3 article, these two American states visited in that season (Nevada and Arizona; ) are not really "countries", but they are actually states (like Hong Kong and Macau in China, and England, Scotland and Northern Ireland in the UK) and part of the U.S., can you revert it back? ApprenticeFan 14:43, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

GITS.

In short - No. DRN requires that both sides are willing to either accomodate and compromise or abide by a third party ruling. As your basis on GITS (as in the DBZ matter) is based on faulty application of guidelines, and you have no intention of ever changing your viewpoint on the issue, DRN is a waste of time and effort. Do not delete/redirect the Ghost in the Shell (manga) article again without seeking consensus on the talkpage there to do so, or feel free to nominate it for deletion. Only in death does duty end (talk) 02:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

You agreeing with Chris does not make a third party ruling particularly when Kim Bruning was trying to work towards a compromise between us and Lucia, although topic banned, is certainly in agreement.—Ryulong (琉竜) 02:32, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

DRN is not a means by which to prevent improvement. 'Compromise' should only be tolerated when it is what is best for the encyclopedia. It is also not mandatory to participate. Only in death does duty end (talk) 02:44, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

It's a way that was at least getting us to the same level, but thanks for completely throwing everything out of the window because you automatically assume that WP:N is all that's needed to consider here.—Ryulong (琉竜) 02:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

It basically is when you go with what other editor's have provided as a wonderful solution to use. I don't see how N can be debatable in a DRN, considering you acknowledge the manga to meet N. Whatever argument you present as to why the manga page should not exist is suited for AFD. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:03, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

The manga meets N but that doesn't mean we need to have a stumpy franchise article now. There was never any reason to have not had these pages meet the layout style at MOSAM and now we have a "franchise page" that doesn't support its own notability. We could have kept it as the manga page and the other things but you would not contribute to it unless the manga was separate and now we have all the history at List of Ghost in the Shell chapters which you basically attempted to make obsolete. If we're going through with this and you really want a list of chapters rammed up this article's ass, can we histmerge the list of chapters back to the (manga) page.—Ryulong (琉竜) 03:04, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Its going to have to be a merge/histmerge. Could I go back in time I would have inserted it at the list article & renamed. As it is there would probably end up being one anyway. But histmerges are not complicated. Only in death does duty end (talk) 03:08, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I do not understand why there had to be "Ghost in the Shell (manga)" separate from both "Ghost in the Shell" and "List of Ghost in the Shell chapters" so we may as well just get rid of the second because it was such a problem in the first place.—Ryulong (琉竜) 03:11, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Hist merge. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:14, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I know what it is. Let's just get it done and over with.—Ryulong (琉竜) 03:15, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Now of course this causes problems with Template:Ghost in the Shell's layout which if I'm being honest is the main reason I felt there was an issue with the pages being separate in the first place.—Ryulong (琉竜) 03:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Layout should be a minor concern, while there are problems, they should never impact the coverage of the subject(s). The template is really minor as well. I'd just move the current GITS page to (franchise) and make GITS redirect to GITS (disamb) for rapid fire access till the underlying situations can be handled. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:33, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

That last bit. Just. No. If you're going to do that we may as well just delete the whole franchise page entirely and just have an ugly disambiguation page in its place.—Ryulong (琉竜) 03:36, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Then shall we do it, and you put the franchise up for AFD as a test? I would have to rewrite the page, but a way forward is what counts. The disamb will make it easy to quickly access the desired content for 60,000 readers a month. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

There's some level of a page not being needed somewhere but we do need some sort of page to describe the connectivity between them. Maybe we don't need the dab page as it stands either. I've proposed something else on the manga talk page as well.—Ryulong (琉竜) 03:50, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Eva: Girlfriend of Steel moves

I'm actually mixed on this move. Yes, it's on the box in English, but (as I'm sure you're well aware) the English and Japanese titles don't match, and I'm not entirely sure that the English appears on the spine of the case. Most importantly, this is not a case where the game was released in English under a different title and we can use that - neither of these games were released outside Japan. Therefore, if we were to apply COMMONNAME, I think we'd have to find out what the Japanese person calls it, and I know my eye is drawn much more to the large Japanese title than the very tiny English one underneath it. I'd also note the interwikis are also inconsistent. ja doesn't use the English subtitle at all, it transliterates the Japanese only, es uses the Englissh and adds a "the," and tl drops the Eva portion and uses the translated title. どうしようかな？ MSJapan (talk) 04:48, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

We have the first one titled "Iron Maiden". I don't see why the second was at "Girlfriend of Steel 2nd" instead of "Iron Maiden 2nd" in the first place.—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:52, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah I fixed that. Iron Maiden would not likely be the official English title because of Iron Maiden, but as long as we are going for accuracy... let's not get into a titling dispute when the common name is Girlfriend of Steel. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:14, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

But an iron maiden is something that exists. And "Neon Genesis Evangelion: Iron Maiden" appears in English on the box. And how can you prove that the common name is Girlfriend of Steel? It's never been released in English.—Ryulong (琉竜) 05:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, do we have any sort of policy on what to do with titles of untranslated works, or could we avoid the problem by just using a romanized title, e.g., Shinseiki evangelion: koutetsu no gyarufurendo? MSJapan (talk) 13:18, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Judging imports and fan community, I'd move to the romanized title would stop the problem and be accurate, but this goes against NC in some fashion because 260,000 each go to Iron Maiden and Girlfriend of Steel when prefixed with Neon Genesis Evangelion. For this we would end up deciding "no common name" exist despite a sizable amount at face value, but the secondary documents simply use the transliterated title and some state both. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:15, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Attack on Titan

Even though you aren't new here I am going to assume you are, as that is the only justification I can see for edit warring and ignoring my justifications, and not providing any evidence to the contrary but simply saying "You're wrong", because you have nothing to back up your claim that you are apparently meant to just list every single form of media down the side of the article. You sir, are wrong and you know it but have some form of WP: OWN issue going on. Feel free to highlighting the guideline or policy that says I am wrong though. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

You boldly removed the infoboxery. I reverted you disagreeing with your rationale. You shouldn't have begun an edit war. This has nothing to do with WP:OWN. Goodbye.—Ryulong (琉竜) 18:25, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

You actually have to give a reason for disagreeing. Reverting by itself is not justification for doing the wrong thing. When given the opportunity here you still fail to explain yourself. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:30, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I did. It's not my fault you don't like it.—Ryulong (琉竜) 05:42, 27 August 2013 (UTC)