User talk:Nique1287/Archive 1

Spoiler tags

I don't see any info on the matter of a Spoiler tag not needed in the Story section. Can you point it out please?

Well, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Final_Fantasy_VII#Spoiler_Warning and that section also links to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Final_Fantasy_VII/archive_3#I.27m_really_pissed.21.21 which should answer your question. Sorry I directed you to the talk page for AC, I forgot which VII-related article's talk page it was on. ^^; Nique1287 22:15, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, all right, thanks. That was an interesting read. The main reason I added that tag is because it seemed like an easy addition that would make it better (as I've seen the movie already, the spoilers didn't bother me). I would agree with that at least one spoiler warning at the top of where the spoilers start wouldn't hurt or prevent people from learning (as Axem Titanium said), since people can *choose* whether they'd like to learn that certain "spoiler" information at this time, or perhaps come back to it later after they've seen the movie/played through the game, etc. Oh well, like it was said it's a dead topic so there's no need to argue about it anymore. :P

Sorry about the revert on Death Note

Didn't realize more than the verb tenses were changed when I compared histories. I was getting confused as to which one I was supposed to revert to out of the 4-5 in the history. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 03:01, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

---

Princess Princess

[1]

Except the English-language version uses "Toru Kouno" WhisperToMe 23:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

thank you for changing the link to punk lolita, I was not aware that there was a stub on it.

About your suggestion everyone takes a break in the ownership discussion on Cat

I'll second that! Thanks!--Ramdrake 18:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks like User:Katzenjammer Katzenjammer has escalated this into an RfC. Care to comment on the talk page? I'd appreciate if you did.--Ramdrake 21:45, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Why did you

Why did you revert my edits, I was making it better 'cause I was naming it chapters not pages, and they are Chapters not pages. -- Metal 22:00, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

reply

All of them come from a blog... there are citations of copyvios ON THE PAGE past episode 3 or so.. and the other 3 are on the same blog. Please revert yourself, I have not done this out of spite. Thank you. -- Chris is me 04:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Here's one for episode 8: [2]. The rest are in the archives of the same blog. I know that copyvios must be nearly word-for-word. -- Chris is me 04:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Please stop reverting me (you may already have, i've just checked episode 1 again). I've proven that they are all from randomc.animeblogger.net , and it's such a pain in the ass to revert 10 pages again. -- Chris is me 04:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! In the future, if you see the same sort of thing, can you revert and report the editor who added the content (as I don't watch said pages)? Thanks! -- Chris is me 04:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that...I'm pretty tired and stressed from work. I still believe I was bold but not reckless from removing the copyvios, but now I know how important it is to include the link into the edit summary and not to make jokes in them. -- Chris is me 04:28, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Just for clarification, copyvios are generally to be removed on sight rather than discussed. Although I should've given a source straight away, I was in no way reckless. -- Chris is me 17:22, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Death Note

I would just like to give a big thank you to all the work that you've been putting into Death Note and related articles. There's a ton of vandelism related to those articles for some reason and I'm glad that someone like you is around to revert them. Please keep up the good work! :)--(十八|talk) 05:22, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Bleach

The template was placed in the article because it was decided upon at [[WP:ANIME], it was placed in the external links section this way it was out of the way of the article. It is currently being placed on all anime/manga articles. If you have any questions about it feel free to leave a comment on my talk page or at WP:ANIME. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 00:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Evolution vs. Mutation

Hi, as per the Cats article, I believe we have come to some disagreement about the use of English. You appear to believe mutation is the correct term rather than evolution. While it is perfectly acceptable, evolution is a more specific and appropriate term. You might compare it to using cutlery instead of spoon in reference to eating ice-cream. According to the Evolve article, "evolution" can be defined:

In the life sciences, evolution is a change in the traits of living organisms over generations, including the emergence of new species. Since the development of modern genetics in the 1940s, evolution has been defined more specifically as a change in the frequency of alleles in a population from one generation to the next.In other fields evolution is used more generally to refer to any process of change over time.

While "mutate" is defined:

Mutations are permanent, sometimes transmissible (if the change is to a germ cell) changes to the genetic material (usually DNA or RNA) of a cell. Mutations can be caused by copying errors in the genetic material during cell division and by exposure to radiation, chemicals, or viruses, or can occur deliberately under cellular control during the processes such as meiosis or hypermutation. ...

I could supply many other references to dictionaries, but I believe Wikipedia is a very appropriate example. As you can see, evolution is much better suited to the article in question. I have changed the words in question back to "evolution"

Cheers, Bennyboyz3000 09:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Also I can see you have past complaints about reverts, perhaps you should consider mulling reverts over more carefully before you make them. Bennyboyz3000 09:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Monty Python

I am not impressed that you wrote RV in your comment about your edit - especially as your edit was not a reversion at all, but merely where you restored a sentence which I had accidentally deleted - and which I was embarrassed to discover was deleted (and which I was on the verge of restoring to the article at the same time as you made your edit). Figaro 23:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I notice that your reversion comment was listed just after my edit - so perhaps you were not referring to my edit at all, but to the edit before mine - if this is the case, I apologise for my comment above. Figaro 23:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments - both on the Monty Python article and on my talk page. As you say, edits do occasionally clash. Once again, please accept my apologies.

By the way, I have now restored the sentence, which I had accidentally deleted, to the Monty Python page.

All the best for the New Year. Figaro 00:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Speculation?

I don't think this edit was exactly speculation[3] considering, among other things, that he makes out with her in the bus stop in manga chapter 31. It may not be worth stating for other reasons, but the only problem with it factually is that it should be changed from "may be" to "is" and it doesn't only apply to the anime. --tjstrf talk 12:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I believe I could write a non-weasel worded version of the sentence, cite it to the manga in 3-4 places, and add it to the character page quite readily. I won't bother doing so, since harem series character pairings are not my area of interest even when they are canon, but it's not speculation. (Another concern would be that it would act as a vandal magnet.) --tjstrf talk 12:31, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

copyvios again

The Death Note episode summaries have the same copyvios in them again.. I'm busy, can you tell the guys who work on Death note articles not to copy and paste anymore? We don't want to break the law. -- Chris is me _(u/c/t) 04:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

FF Articles

Hi, Nique. I hope you are doing well. I am getting better and better on the Final Fantasy articles as usual. I usually do my best on most of the articles at Wikipedia. I joined Wikipedia near the end of December 2006, which was not really long ago, just so you know. How's everything going with you? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sjones23 (talk • contribs) 12:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

Hi once again, Nique. Thanks for the comments on my talk page earlier. Sometimes, edits do clash, like it is said on the earlier "Monty Python" talks by Figaro and in some Final Fantasy articles. Please accept my apologies for any bad mistakes in my editing if I did do so. I have done much better lately on editing some of these articles usually adding accurate edit summaries. You know what I mean? I will always do my best as a nice and caring Wikipedian. Thanks for everything you've done for me, and I will like to quote from you: "don't lose your enthusiasm, no matter what happens!" ^^ Sjones23 03:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Death Note themes

I won't violate 3RR, but the info is going up tomorrow. Did you even check the talk page or look at the sources? The band's own web page confirms this, as do numerous others. Your personal feeling that ANN "might be wrong" is your own POV. I also said on the talk page to at the very least leave the first citation as it applies to the original OP/ED as well and those were unsourced to begin with. Onikage725 23:46, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, I see other editors have brought up issue with reverts. I understand the need to protect articles from potential vandalism (just browse the history of a Dragon Ball article and you'll see what a full time job that can be), but there are also times when it is better to discuss a disagreed edit on the talk page rather than inciting a potential edit war. That hurts the article, the readers, and ourselves and what we're trying to do. Onikage725 00:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey Nique, how does it look to you now? Instead of putting it as a list with the other songs, I made a note about the press announcement. That way when it takes place it can be merged, and if something happens it can be erased. I also changed citations to footnotes, made one for the Nightmare songs to the official page, and added some info on the DS game. What do you think? Onikage725 18:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

On this issue

My counter-accusations, such as they were, stem mainly from the guidelines on reverting. Namely- "Do not simply revert changes that are made as part of a dispute. Be respectful to other editors, their contributions and their points of view." "Do not revert good faith edits. In other words, try to consider the editor "on the other end." If what one is attempting is a positive contribution to Wikipedia, a revert of those contributions is inappropriate unless, and only unless, you as an editor possess firm, substantive, and objective proof to the contrary. Mere disagreement is not such proof. See also Wikipedia: Assume good faith." "There's sometimes trouble determining whether some claim is true or useful, particularly when there are few people "on board" who are knowledgeable about the topic. In such a case, it's a good idea to raise objections on a talk page." "Do not revert changes simply because someone makes an edit you consider problematic, biased, or inaccurate. Improve the edit, rather than reverting it."

You'll note that I tried to compromise by instead of listing the new themes as such, saying that it had been reported and citing the site the info came from. You don't feel the site is an appropriate source. I feel that an official site counts as a primary source. We disagree. That's fine, I deleted the section in question.

The fact is, you ignored my attempts to resolve this. You have flat out insisted that I am wrong and you are right. You claim to have reached a consensus, when from what I can tell there have been 3 users on the talk page against, one of whom has made two small comments about Naruto episode lists and an unsubstantiated assumption that the band is perpetuating a hoax. On the talk page has been myself but also one of the reverts was reverted back with the info in by another user. 3 over 2 =/= consensus.

Also note on consensus, When there are disagreements, they are resolved through polite discussion and negotiation, in an attempt to develop a consensus. I had to force the issue to bring it to a discussion, and any effort to negotiate was ignored or reverted. I also added information on the upcoming DS game (started the section in the first place), yet you claim that my edits of late "refused to consider not only the integrity of Wikipedia." You're "trying very hard right now to remain within the Assume Good Faith guideline with regards to (my) accusations?" I'm having much the same problem in regards to yours.

I would much prefer to work with you rather than against, but I can't if you aren't willing to do the same? So lay it on me, your side, and let's try to work this out ok? Onikage725 18:05, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Game manuals/strategy guides

Hi, do you have any game manuals or official strategy guides for the following games:

• Final Fantasy III
• Final Fantasy X (I lost mine)
• Final Fantasy Tactics Advance
• Final Fantasy XI

That would be great, because I'm sourcing the character class page. Thanks — Deckiller 18:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, VII would help out for the character class page. That would really go a long way to having reliable secondary sources if you could help ref anything on the character class page via the Final Fantasy 7 strategy guide (it's better than using the game manual, because it's a secondary source). — Deckiller 18:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Archiving comments

I am not being rude by removing (from my talk page) previous discussions - I am merely putting them in archive pages. This is allowed - other people do so, so why am I being criticised for doing the same thing as them? If I left every single comment on my talk page it would now be immensely long. Your comment will also be put away on an archive page, now.

Why should anyone be interested in what my previous discussions have been about, anyway. Figaro 13:27, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

If you continue to harass me, I will be reporting your conduct to the Wikipedia Administrators. The content of user talk pages is personal (to the user concerned). Bullying of other users is not allowed.

You have no right to judge me (as a person) by the edits I make to my own user pages (I do not judge other people by the edits they make to their own talk pages - nor do I read the correspondence). Do you have nothing better to do than to harass other users and read their personal and private correspondence? Get a life! Figaro 15:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

It really seems that you are interested in reading my personal correspondence. If it is so important to you to do so, then why not just check the history section - all the comments have been preserved there.

You are insulting in your insinuation about my archiving the comments. I am not a liar and, for your information, I have been archiving the comments — but why you should be so interested in another person's personal and private correspondence is beyond me (I am not interested your correspondence — nor am I interested in any other user's correspondence).

A person's contribution to Wikipedia is more important than the edits a person makes to his or her talk page. Have you even bothered to check out my contributions (to which there is a link from my user page) to discover what type of editor I am — or don't contributions to Wikipedia mean as much to you as a user's talk page.....

You are just a pedantic nuisance and I cannot be bothered with you and your comments any more — you are not worth it, or worth my time. Goodbye. Figaro 07:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Your sex does not matter with regard to this — it does not alter the fact that you are pedantic. I did not know this until you pointed the fact out to me, so I did not mean any offence when I accidentally wrote 'he' and 'his' etc.

You have also insulted me, by your comments towards myself, by using the word 'supposed'. Things would have gone a lot more smoothly if you had politely requested me to link to the archive pages from the talk page, without continually returning the archived comments to my talk page — and if you had not used the insulting words supposed archiving (your keeping on editing my talk page is also not appreciated — I have never edited your page — apart from writing my own comments — and I have never edited the talk pages of any other user — again, except for my own comments). I would consider such an action an impudence on my part if I had done so.

For you information, I have now requested information about the archiving (and linking) of comments on a user talk page, from a Wikipedia administrator, and I will be guided by what the administrator says about the situation (not by what you say).

As I said before - goodbye. Figaro 12:52, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I have commented that I did not know that you were a female — until you mentioned it — and my referring to you as 'he' and 'his' was not intended to be offensive.

With regard to the comments on the talk page, comments from one of the users was of a personal and private nature (i.e. not connected in any way with Wikipedia) and, therefore, because the comments were personal and private, the comments from that user will not be archived for public notice (you see, I am not misleading you in regard to this). Every other comment, though will be available via links from the talk page. Figaro 14:10, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

And you have a history of harassment — i.e. putting pressure on another user to do your bidding — continually returning already archived comments to another user's talk page — your refusal to accept reconciliation (which I had attempted when I stated that I was intending to archive the pages in a new format, by genre or chronological order, and linking them from my talk page — which included your stated refusal when I requested your patience while I did this) — your comment that you will be checking to make sure that I archive all comments which have ever been made on my talk page, and giving me a deadline (of a week) for getting the work done (I am not your servant, nor are you a Wikipedia administrator — you have no right to make demands on me to do your bidding). In your actions you have shown yourself to be bossy by nature, as well as an extremely nosy busybody (otherwise you would not be checking every single comment which has ever had put onto my talk page to make sure that everything will be open to the public view). You have dragged up my past problems with some other users (none of which has anything to do with the present situation — in fact, a person I was having problems with was also having problems with many other users and was blocked from editing Wikipedia because of his actions — and no, the problem did not originate with me, nor did I have any influence on the outcome). With respect to yourself, you began this edit war — I did not.

The personal comments, which I referred to, were with regard to my identity as a person, because another user thought I might be a friend of his and wanted to check this out — a user's identity is something which is supposed to be protected by becoming a member of Wikipedia (or have you conveniently forgotten this factor), so you have no right to demand that I make these personal comments to me available to the public sector (in fact, you have no right to demand anything of me). As I have already commented, I will not be archiving the relevant very personal and private comments for public viewing).

You have been so busy with regard to my user pages that I have to ask the obvious question — what exactly have you actually contributed to Wikipedia as a member to enchance it as an encyclopedia (hint — harassment of other users does not count).

For you information, I have been intending to try to fix up the archiving of comments for the links from the talk page as soon as possible — it did not need your impertinent deadline demand for me to do so, nor your threats. And, as I have already stated, I do not lie. Nor am I a busybody. Figaro 12:12, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I have just received an answer, from the Wikipedia administrator, to my question about linking archived pages from a user's talk page, and have been told that I do not have to do so. Therefore, I will leave the archiving the way it is — minus your demanded links. As I commented to you previously, I intend to go by what the Wikipedia administrator has said. And now, a final goodbye from me to you. Figaro 12:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

List of Final Fantasy VII characters

• Thanks for fixing my error. I really should have looked up the kana, but it was 4am. Sorry. ^_^ JuJube 22:35, 11 February 2007 (UTC)