User talk:Kusonaga/Archive 2

Image copyright problem with Image:CrimsonAvengerIII.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:CrimsonAvengerIII.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Hetar 04:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah yeah, it's fixed already. Kusonaga 09:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Spectre

I'm thinking the original Corrigan should get the main SHB image and not the new one. Since you seem to have almost all of his issues, I was wondering if you could you scan a good image of the original Corrigan?

He could either look human, or have white skin like this one. --DrBat 23:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for asking about the collaboration. When I added Jim Corrigan to my user page, there wasn't a lot to the article. You've done a really good job on it since then. I'm not sure what I could add at the moment, but if there's anything you want help with, let me know. CovenantD 17:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

fedina

Fair use images on your userpage.

Hi there, just wanted to bring to your attention that Wikipedia's policy on fair use images is to not allow them to be used outside of articles, so please remove the various logos from your userpage. Thanks. --Sherool (talk) 17:29, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Avengers template name fixes?

Hi, I love the Avengers template, but it looks like a few of the members will need name cleanups. I'd do it myself if I knew how. First of, you've got "D-Man" in there, but his article is under Demolition Man (comics) Also, Stingray is under Stingray (comics) Same deal for Justice (comics) Love the template, great job! Thanks again

--El benito 18:35, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, nevermind then. I didn't quite realize that it was built to prevent linking to itself, which means that every page that I looked at didn't have a link to itself. Quite sorry about that.

--El benito 02:38, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

My first barnstar! I'm so touched. Thank you. CovenantD 16:55, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

It's about time you got one. Kusonaga 17:06, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Banshee

If you want to add back the one with Mystique, go ahead.
And I think the Deadly Genesis cover is better than the panel it replaced; it shows Wolverine mournfully holding Banshee's body. --DrBat 19:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Checkmate

You did a great job in the article, man, really great. I'd award you if I hadn't done it already (lol) Keep up the good work! ;) —Lesfer ^(talk/@) 21:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Beast

Hello, I see that you reverted a couple of changes I made to Beast (comics), and I was wondering why. It looks to me as if you might have been reverting an earlier change to the formatting of the Superherobox, and our edits just overlapped. If you did intend to revert my changes, please let me know & we can discuss it on Beast's talk page. The major edit that I made, regarding how Beast got his fur, was done while looking at the issue in which it happened, so I'm pretty sure of it and am going to restore it for now. --Celithemis 04:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Captain Atom

Hi there! What about the merge? —Lesfer ^(talk/@) 15:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, cool :)
Moving subjects, would you help me to keep an eye on Monarch (comics) and 68.80.95.27 (talk · contribs)? He's just disrespected a consensus on roman numerals reached in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics which I've already fixed. Cheers! —Lesfer ^(talk/@) 17:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Joshua Clay

Thanks for pointing out the problems with the Joshua Clay article. I kept trying to fix problems with run-on sentences, misspellings, style errors, etc., but someone who didn't like other people editing the page kept reverting. He hasn't undone my last couple of edits, so maybe we've gotten past that, but having done a lot of edits only to get the work reverted twice, I'm reluctant to do it all a third time. I hope that your comment on that talk page will help get the message across. Doczilla 22:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Sand (comics)

Hey, man! Take a look at Sand (comics) and Sandman (Sandy Hawkins). Shouldn't these be only one article named Sand Hawkins? Besides, we don't even know if this new Sandman is really Sand Hawkins. We should wait DC's official word on it and avoid speculations. Thoughts? —Lesfer ^(talk/@) 18:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I think Sandman (Sandy Hawkins) needs to be speedy deleted by the author's request. Anyway, check Sandy Hawkins ;) —Lesfer ^(talk/@) 19:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Please, buddy, check on Brian Boru is awesome contribs at Sandy Hawkins. Sometimes I wonder if this guy is just playing a character. I honestly get the impression that he tries to be difficult. —Lesfer ^(talk/@) 21:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Please, back me up if he insists on that nonsense about Hawkins have been the Silver Age Sandman on that JSA story arc. He was briefly a Sandman, but not the Silver Age one! That was Garrett Sanford. I've tried to told him but he just won't listen. Or do not want to. —Lesfer ^(talk/@) 04:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: watchlist

I see your point and I thank you for your input, but after seeing the Conan page my only conclusion was that he must be a vandal. As I stated on the Monarch page, I consider the matter resolved. --Basique 16:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Raker Qarrigat

I've put plenty of time into the article (from creation onwards) and several people have come away quite happy with it. If you want to change it to your version, then I suggest we put it to some kind of vote if such a forum for disagreements exist. Let me know. Please do not revert without going tru that forum. I dont feel like starting an edit war and would like to resolve it in a civil way.

Sunburst 23:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Kusonaga

The discussion I was going for was Civil. By using the word DICK, you proved yourself to be one. The tone of your argument is particularly rude, insulting and arrogant.

Here's what I would have liked to have done

• • Horrid image. (a clean, whited background as opposed to that mess)

     Choice of image is subjective. My opinion is it is good, yours is it is bad. niether opinion has much validity. 

• • No artist credit for the image. (which should pretty much always be employed)

     Good point. agreed.  I didnt add the box, and belittling thier efforts does not help the community orientation of wiki, a simple addition will be fine.

• • Wiki-linking of dates. (only wiki-link dates when they are relevant)

     I didnt wikidate the links, they were done by others. you could have easily said so and it would have been taken care off. 

• • No creator listing. (which is particularly asinine)

     again, rude language. i dont come often to wiki, all that would have been needed was a request.

• • Adding 'none' to SHB's. (which shouldn't be done)

• • Adding the relatives section to the SHB. (which doesn't exist in the box)

        just remove it. 

• • Lack of present tense throughout the article. (fictional characters exist in a continious literary present. Raker Qarrigat 'was' not a DC character, Raker Qarrigat is a DC character)

       What was done by the character was in the past. if current actions were ongoing, it would have been presented as such.

• • Lack of relevant info in introduction, which should include first appearance and creator credits.

       All were discussed in the box.

• • The main body of text is overly verbose, often giving detail that either isn't relevant or tries to make it read like a fanfic. (don't forget, this is an encyclopedia)

      the very defination of people who follow these stories is fan. theres nothing wrong about this.

• • No bibliography. (The character has all of two appearances, which should be noted)

      a simple addition would have suffice rather then hacking the article to bits.

• • Speculation. (we try and avoid speculation as much as we can)

      no idea what you are talking about

• • Links to irrelevant sites. (neither site hardly even mentions Raker Qarrigat)

     didnt add the links, when it was added, i simply respected the intent of the user to add his bit to the page. 

Now, I'm going to revert it again. If you do so again without being able to counter any of the points brought up, we can, if necessary ask other users to weigh in, or as a last resort, bring this to a mediation council, but I don't really think that should be necessary.

Now, I'm going to revert it back. you dont like it, revert it back, be a dick. seems to fit you and your language. if you want to send it to a mediation board, fine. either way i prefer not to have further discussions with you and deal with your manners.

Sunburst 17:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

and finally for now..

K,

I asked you to talk to me before making such drastic changes again. Given that i wrote most of it, it would have been CIVIL and COURTEOUS of you to talk. But as you said, you were "not" trying being a dick and went ahead and did it.

Yes, I agree with somethings and disagree with others. I havent have the time to make the changes yet.

It was your language and tone that offended me FULLY. Using the word Dick at the begining of your note and then claiming not wanting to offend is doublefaced. at one point you refer to something as asinine (sic). Being that Wikipedia is worldwide I dont know where you are from, but if you used this language directly where I'm from it will have you kicked hard.

Unfortunately I dont have the time to continue this given that i can only once in a while come by and check the page. Given that you have the time, you win this little ego trip of yours by default for now. There is a grammatical mistake i noticed on your page, you may have to correct that (sad you'll be using so much of what i put in).

however, lets make something very clear, you do seem like a prick.

Sunburst 00:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Tarantula and Nightwing

In this edit [1] you wrote that Nightwing was drugged while having sex with Tarantula. I've just read over Nightwing #93 again, and I don't see any place in that issue where he becomes drugged. Can you explain why you wrote that he was drugged? Thanks. —Lowellian (reply) 06:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Just to be sure, I re-read Nightwing #92 also. I don't see any place where he would be drugged. He was just in complete shock from having "failed Bruce," and I suppose it could be said that Tarantula took advantage of his mental state, but he could have certainly said "no" but didn't, so I don't see how she can be called a rapist (Nightwing also voluntarily stayed with her over the next few weeks). I think there might be some confusion with the next issue, #94, in which Nightwing drugs himself with "epinephrine with a generalized viperid antitoxin" in order to protect himself against Copperhead (the DC version, not the Marvel Serpent Society version, obviously). —Lowellian (reply) 11:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I took out the "drugged" part from the Tarantula article and added some citations to essays and discussions on whether Nightwing was raped. —Lowellian (reply) 11:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that link to the Devin K. Grayson interview. The artist of #93 was indeed Patrick Zircher. I'm leaving my opinion out of the article and just letting the citations, which represent several different views, speak for themselves. —Lowellian (reply) 15:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Your Avengers members navbox thing

Hey I just got this from ChrisGriwold, who I also seem to clash with. I'm stubborn... he's stubborn... ah well.

• "These navbox templates you've been adding are under discussion at the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Comics#These_Infoboxes talk page. Please stop creating and adding these while we discuss them. Currently, the discussion appears to be going against their inclusion in articles, so you may want to join the discussion to present your opinion. Good luck.--Chris Griswold (☎☓) 01:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC)"

This includes your Avengers one you created. So dude, I guess if we want them kept we better start defending them otherwise they may do their little lets delete it and that would [CENSORED] me off!.

Sweet

Evermore (Originalsinner)

Buffy the Vampire Slayer under peer review

As a Wikipedian who contributes to Buffy-related articles, you maybe interested to know that Buffy the Vampire Slayer is currently under peer review at Peer review/Buffy the Vampire Slayer. It is hoped that this article might soon become a featured one. Feedback about the article at the forum, on how it might be improved upon is hugely appreciated. Thanks. -- Paxomen 17:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Featured article candidate review: Buffy article

Hi

Just letting WikiProject Buffyverse members know that the article 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' has recently been nominated as a candidate to become a featured article. Should it become a featured article, it will be possible for the article to appear on the Wikipedia main page on March 10th 2007, the 10th anniversary of Buffy (the premiere, "Welcome to the Hellmouth" aired March 10th 1997).

Any feedback you can offer to improve the article and/or to either object or support the nomination would be wonderful:

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Buffy the Vampire Slayer

-- Paxomen 17:31, 21 September 2006 (UTC)