Open main menu
Archive 1 Archive 2

Contents

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, 1989, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like Wikipedia and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  - Ahunt (talk) 20:37, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Change of accounts

The Arbitration Committee has reviewed and granted a request to allow you to edit as User:1989 instead of User:Blurred Lines. You remain under a one-account restriction, so you must cease any editing from Blurred Lines and edit solely from this account.

For the Arbitration Committee, GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:44, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

 Hello, 1989. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thanks for your G13 work, and Happy New Year S Philbrick(Talk) 16:20, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Tomohiro Kojiri

1989, Would you please restore User:Crtew/Tomohiro Kojiri so that I can merge it into the WP article Tomohiro Kojiri. Thank you for your interest in this article. Crtew (talk) 22:22, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Please see WP:REFUND/G13. -- 1989 (talk) 22:46, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

WP:UAA reports

Hi there, fellow UAA reporter. I've noticed that you've been reporting some users with no contributions, so I think this comment from Beeblebrox on my user page may be pertinent to your situation. Happy editing! Zupotachyon Ping me (talkcontribs) 02:36, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

@Zupotachyon and Beeblebrox: Huh. I guess deleted edits don't count. -- 1989 (talk) 02:38, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
@1989: The ones I reported had no edits, including deleted ones. I don't know about your circumstances - if you reported before their edits were deleted, then please ignore my blabbering over here. Zupotachyon Ping me (talkcontribs) 02:39, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Barnstar

  The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For tirelessly working to identify and tag G13 candidates. Thanks, and keep up the great work! -FASTILY 06:35, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Reply

In regards to the robo-message you just left on my talk page: first off, this was never an AFC submission. Certain AFC participants took it upon themselves to perform an WP:OWN hijacking of this and other works-in-progress I moved to draftspace. This was done with zero regard for the notability of the topic and zero regard for what's supposed to be the collaborative nature of this project. This follows the pattern of AFC in general. These folks think it's okay to keep submissions bottled up and eventually delete them with zero notice to interested editors (a few scattered exceptions notwithstanding), while releasing other submissions into article space with inherent problems and not caring that those same editors will have no choice but to deal with fixing those problems. That's called a "one-way street". That's also called a "double standard" (I prefer "hypocrisy"). My watchlist reveals ongoing discussion at Wikipedia talk:Drafts about the continued necessity of G13, portions of which contradict the attitude AFC has shown towards draftspace being their private playground. My watchlist also shows the recent deletion of a draft which was assessed as Mid-Importance for a WikiProject, yet another clear sign of bad faith towards expanding our coverage of notable topics. A glance at your recent edits shows a pattern of going through the motions, clearing backlogs for the sake of clearing backlogs. In summary, if you don't care about covering what's notable in the world, don't ask me to care. Go and do what you feel you need to do, just so long as you don't expect me to have anything to do with it. These projects of mine have been under constant assault. I've already taken them offline in anticipation of further assaults and am continuing to work on them offline. I'll be happy to bring them back when I see evidence that other editors are serious about expanding our coverage of notable topics, serious about good faith and serious about collaboration. The main reason I'm writing this to you is to have something I can point to whenever you happen to show up at RFA trumpeting your "accomplishments" at AFC. Have a nice day. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 01:36, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

@RadioKAOS: When I saw the page that you are talking about, it was tagged, and reviewed (declined). If you didn't add the AfC tag, a bot may have been assigned to automatically add the AfC tag to draft pages that don't have it. You may have not been aware of that if you haven't been watching the page. I don't tag pages with speedy without the AfC tag, and the expired six month limit. Please understand that I did not tag the page that you have been working on to cause disruption or bad blood. I'm just volunteering, and following procedure. Also, I cannot tag something for deletion without notifying the author, so if you don't want those messages, just ignore them. -- 1989 (talk) 02:38, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
User:1989 - I originally planned to come here to say that it wasn't my draft that was tagged for WP:G13. Since that draft is already gone, I can't check the history, but I assume that I moved it from a user sandbox into draft space six months ago, and may or may not have also declined it. I personally don't think that G13 is a useful speedy deletion criterion, because I see no need to get rid of crud in draft space. (Crud that is repeatedly resubmitted can be taken to MFD.) I also don't understand the hostility by User:RadioKAOS. Oh well. Thank you, 1989, for helping with an unnecessary rule. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:46, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the Note!

Hi 1989,

My article was already deleted, but I followed the procedure to try to get it back. I appreciate you sending me a note because I had given up hope of editing it more. Hopefully they will restore it.

Thank you! Athomeeditor (talk) 07:03, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Episode list renames and project assessment

Please stop and undo your mass renames and bring the topic to WT:ANIME before continuing this bold, but reckless action. There is no consensus to rename anime episode lists in the faction you have. Also, all episode lists are assessed as normal articles per the instructions at WP:ANIME/ASSESS. So your changing the assessment to "List" is entirely disruptive. —Farix (t | c) 02:09, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Also note MOS:AM#Media states, "If a given list is long compared to the rest of the article, consider splitting it out to a separate article titled List of (series) episodes, List of (series) chapters, List of (series) novels, or similar." So the naming convention of these list articles is completely acceptable and will require discussion and consensus with the above mentioned WikiProject before any mass renaming of list articles within the project's scope. —Farix (t | c) 02:29, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
@TheFarix: My mistake. I was just following WP:TVSEASON. Keep in mind, if you are not aware of it, that this kind of renaming has happened to Bleach season articles in the past, which I found out later, and figured my renaming was no big deal. [1] If you figure those renames were wrong was well, you could revert those as well, if you'd like. I was not aware of the WP list era, so please forgive my mistake. -- 1989 (talk) 02:29, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
I withdrew my CSD G6 nominations (see my contributions). Thanks so much for recognizing my mistakes, and alerting me. -- 1989 (talk) 02:54, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Quick note on archives

Hi! I was looking through your user talk page as I was responding to your poll on WP:ORCP poll, and I noticed you didn't have any links to your talk page archives on this page. There's no requirement that you have them, but I think it might be pretty helpful to both yourself and other editors. {{Talk header}} provides this automatically, along with some other useful information (look at the top of my talk page to see how it looks), but if you just want the list of archives, try {{Archive banner}} or {{Archive box}}. Just wanted to let you know. Enterprisey (talk!) 01:40, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

@Enterprisey: I may consider it. I just withdrew my poll because IMO, it was too early, even when it was recommended to me, but if you still care to give advice, that'd be helpful. -- 1989 (talk) 04:49, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Naruto

Normally I don't leave messages on talk pages after reverting unless absolutely necessary but as I can see you are looking at making improvements to the series articles I'll make an exception this time.

As THEM Anime is a reliable source which has been vetted for anime articles, I think removing their comments based on the use of a fansub to be unnecessary. Many of the comments being used are regarding visual aspects which would not be affected by how they watched it. It could be argued that their comments on other areas are less acceptable but they are still valid as their opinion. Additionally being that they are critical of the series in those regards they are especially useful for providing neutral coverage across the article.

I don't think removing them improves the article.SephyTheThird (talk) 19:43, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Too many copy-editing Requests

Hey there! Thanks for submitting copy-editing Requests to the Guild of Copy Editors. It looks like you didn't notice the fine print at the top of the page that says "You may have up to three open requests at any one time. This is enforced so that every request can have a fair chance of being fulfilled within a reasonable period."

Can you please withdraw two of your Requests from the page? Once any of your three remaining requests are processed, you are welcome to resubmit another. Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:20, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

  Done -- 1989 (talk) 09:55, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. You are welcome to resubmit any time, as long as you stay under three simultaneous requests. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:42, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ordination Hall

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:The sculptures of two mythical giant demons, Thotsakan and Sahatsadecha, guarding the eastern gate of the main chapel of Wat Arun, Bangkok.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:37, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Naruto's image

Do you think there might be a better image of Naruto Part 1 by the manga author. I mean, in the current one, he is covering his own face, which fails to be make a full shot of the character. Anyway, good luck with your work. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 02:04, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

@Tintor2: I had a small feeling that you would say something about that. If I can find something better, I will update it. I updated it because the image you had was just a portrait, I wanted to have a full body of him. For now, if you'd want me too, I could reference the main article in the caption, for readers whom want to see his face. For me, it's not really a big deal, since readers could also google Naruto in the images section for it. -- MCMLXXXIX 02:11, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Sorry if this annoyed you, but wikipedia tends to have these guidelines specially if in the future you want to nominate an article to FA. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 02:16, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
@Tintor2: The ones I'm finding are the ones from the anime (not screenshots, but him on a white background). I have a feeling that's not your preference. -- MCMLXXXIX 02:30, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Reviewers might prefer the primary artists. However, I'm pretty sure there could be more in artbooks. Anyway, don't worry about it too much. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 02:36, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Tintor2: Ok. Well speaking of Naruto Uzumaki, do you think the article is ready for FA? IMO, I think it has enough information to become one. If you nominate it, I would fully support it, unless you want me to handle it. MCMLXXXIX 02:45, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't know much about prose, but I wonder if it could be trimmed. Since Allen Walker is the only FA from anime and manga project, I suggest using it as a model (although there is a lot about Naruto's creation and reception). For multiple ideas, try a peer review. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 13:44, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
  Done -- MCMLXXXIX 14:58, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Re: Question

It depends. Length of summaries are often different but most important point is that they are consistent and easy to understand to a casual reader. If you see an unneeded detail in a episode summary, remove it unless it is mentioned later in same article.Tintor2 (talk) 14:37, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Rollbacker

I have granted the "rollbacker" permission to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. – Gilliam (talk) 21:04, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Great Vowel Shift

I saw your reversion in Great Vowel Shift. Please do not revert edits unless you have a good-faith reason to believe they are incorrect or non-constructive. Simply reverting an edit because you believe there is not sufficient sourcing it is bad form (that is what the citation needed template is for). Granted if appropriate sourcing is not supplied within a reasonable amount of time, deletion may be appropriate.

Thanks.

--MC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.131.2.3 (talk) 22:29, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Reverting my edits

@1989: Firstly, I want to say you reverted all my edits, even my edits that fixed links and fixed the wording of the sentence. Secondly, I removed the sources because they aren't reliable sources. Those sources aren't supported by Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. I'm only following what another user told me last month after they showed me that article and now I know that those sources were not suitable for that page, hence the reason why I removed it. Could you tell me why all three of my edits were unconstructive? I'm not a new user, I've been editing Wikipedia for many years as an IP user. My IP address changes all the time that's why I look like a new user. (121.214.96.118 (talk) 23:46, 10 February 2017 (UTC))

I reverted your edits, please look at the edits that are made because sometimes they are constructive. (121.214.96.118 (talk) 01:28, 11 February 2017 (UTC))

Re: Burlington, VT edit

Hi, Regarding the Burlington, VT edit, I was editing for accuracy based on the source. The statement was that Burlington was ranked as a best place to live, but the source article was "Best Places for Men to Live." Since lots of people are not men, I do not find that article to be a universal recommendation. So I added "for men" to live. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.30.231.94 (talk) 00:34, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

A mistake was made

A mistake was made. "Principal LBGT Tourism locations" do not exist. Thus, I will be reverting your edit. Testosterenbom (talk) 00:58, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Kropyvnytskyi

Kropyvnytskyi Airport is a present name of Kirovohrad Airport. Kirovohrad city was renamed to Kropyvnytskyi city and airport was renamed too. Sorry what i have vandalized? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DRyaboshapka (talkcontribs) 23:30, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Reverting edits

You recently reverted my edits stating that they were not constructive. I think they are. They tell more about the place, way to reach and accommodation. Could you elaborate on why they are not constructive?

Re: Rhys James

He said in a YouTube video that he is 6'1" tall. I didn't know how to add it to the information part. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yizz (talkcontribs) 01:55, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Your previous caution to anon editor

Your previous polite caution to anon editor at Fifty Shades Darker appears to not being heeded (IP121). JohnWickTwo (talk) 05:37, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki! + Congratulations

Hello, 1989, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Here are some pages which are a little more fun:

  • The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users!
  • Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!

We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:47, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

 

Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.


 
The Anti-Vandalism + STiki Barnstar
 

Congratulations, 1989! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the 1,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:47, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

You warned me for vandalizing

I don't think what I did was vandalizing to the article you mentioned. Could you clarify why you thought it was? I'm not questioning your abilities or anything. Cordially, --Edittrack121 (talk) 15:10, 12 February 2017 (UTC).

@Edittrack121: See WP:NOT#OR. MCMLXXXIX 15:28, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the speedy response. Another question, not meaning to be impertinant, some other guy reverted an edit I made based on me being identified as a vandal via my talk page. Are they allowed to do that? @1989: --Edittrack121 (talk) 15:29, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Could you link it? MCMLXXXIX 15:34, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mary_Bell&diff=764768471&oldid=764761020.--Edittrack121 (talk) 15:35, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
No, they're not allowed unless the edit is unconstructive. I reverted it. MCMLXXXIX 15:46, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you.--Edittrack121 (talk) 15:56, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Rabies

Rabies has a mortality rate of 99.99%. Here's another photo of that particular guy back in 1959:-

http://images.sciencesource.com/preview/14610100/BW0257.html

Note the convulsions. Also note the nasal hemorrhage. That's because the man had "furious rabies" (Google it) which is the reason why he was restrained. There is simply no way that man could have survived even in 2017, never mind 1959. When those symptoms appear, it's already too late to save them. Even in 2017, all that can be done for such patients is to provide "palliative care" i.e. keep the patient comfortable and sedated until they die, typically after 7 days.

Bottom line:- my edit was factual and correct. Your reversion of it was a mistake. Don't bother commenting on my IP page. I won't bother responding or getting into an edit-war with you because I really can't be bothered. I have better things to do with my time!

Naruto

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Naruto has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Good luck with the FA attempt.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 22:31, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Nogales, Arizona

Hi,

You recently marked my edit to Nogales, Arizona as not constructive. Verita Bouvaire-Thompson was listed as a notable person from Nogales, but there was no description of who she was. I added one, using the first sentence of her Wiki entry. How is that not constructive? Is it okay to list her name but not mention who she is? This is confusing to me. IMHO, either mention who she is or remove her name from the list of notable people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.46.250.148 (talk) 17:50, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

My mistake. I reverted it. MCMLXXXIX 18:49, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
No worries. 199.46.250.148 (talk) 18:57, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

RE: Recent Nightwing page edit.

I put "material from #19" because the original version implies the trade has the entire issue of #19 collected within it, when in fact it only has two pages from that issue. Source: I own the actual trade. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.113.150.210 (talk) 21:12, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Naruto Shippuden list

I don't know if it is okay or not, but the anon appears to be doing it in good faith. I remember the early Shippuden episodes had a small pacing so I guess they are okay as far as I see.Tintor2 (talk) 21:41, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Danielle Harris

It was like that for over a year until it was changed from some reason. I like it better like that, it implies both making the character feel & showing it to the audience.Fleshy Tony (talk) 22:49, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Car Wash edit

Why was my contribution about German water pollution regulations restricting car washing deemed not constructive to the section about environmental factors of car washing?2A02:C7D:5E6F:CC00:B03D:FB45:5DA7:2D0C (talk) 17:28, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

My mistake, I reverted it. MCMLXXXIX 17:30, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Ferrari Daytona Picture

If you thought the addition I made didn't add anything, why not just undo the edit rather than remove the whole picture and caption - both of which have been up there for several years...??? Beltane43 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beltane43 (talkcontribs) 18:38, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

The whole image was removed, by someone else, because it was deleted as a copyright violation. MCMLXXXIX 18:47, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Automatic reversion for supposed vandalism

Please can you clarify why my assertion that paul bilzerian, the subject's father, is a "convicted fraudster" has been automatically reverted to previous in this article. I would neither consider this libellous nor insufficiently sourced, as there have been several investigations conducted, including by the new york times and the wall street journal (which do not qualify as tabloid yet are not used as sources) whereas the "las vegas sun" (a veritable paper of record!) is cited 4 times in the article including a subsection of 1 sentence about "charity" that I would consider neither notable or accurately sourced. please can you go look into this page and get back to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sennsational (talkcontribs) 20:26, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Please keep an eye on IP # 121.214.96.118

S/he seems to be making unconstructive edits to the Puthandu page. I am not sure what his/her motive is. The last few digits of the IP number change but its evidently the same individual. Please keep an eye. I will do so as well.

Thank you

Dipendra2007 (talk) 20:47, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Dash (cryptocurrency)

right before the 9th citation i propose you change the word instamine to fastmine, the accelerated release of blocks due to difficulty did not happen in an "instant" it happened quickly


causing the instamine".[9] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.254.73.145 (talk) 16:11, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

How can we add related subject to link or information?

Hello,


How can we add related subject to link or information.


Trying This Subjects:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzK18PmMK8-3NlhpdnpDSVlITzA/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzK18PmMK8-3a1FZTmh5dG5xcjg/view



Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferditekin (talkcontribs)

See WP:NOTOPINION. Please use other links that were not created by you. MCMLXXXIX 18:52, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Naruto UzUmaki

Hello:

I have had a look at the article as requested. Only a few minor tweaks were necessary,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:38, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Richard Herring page

Hi Just corrected the name of RH's next Edinburgh show to the correct title "Oh Frig, I'm 50!", not "Oh Flip, I'm 50!'. So can you please change it back so that it is right please — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.155.154.33 (talk) 10:13, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Do you have a link to confirm this? MCMLXXXIX 11:26, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

List of Naruto chapters (Part II, volumes 49–72) copyedit


Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Water Drop

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Water drop 001.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:35, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Impending Doom - Nailed Dead Risen

I was going by the fact that most, if not all of the breakdowns present on the album were of the single note half-time variety common in both their later music and deathcore as a whole. The song In Reverence Of is probably the best example of what I mean since it has numerous breakdowns in a relatively short length. It's not unheard of for goregrind/deathgrind bands to have breakdowns, and obviously the influence of those genres is heavily present in the album, but when those bands do have breakdowns, they're usually faster and more rhythmically complex. Think Dying Fetus or Suffocation. But I understand not everyone is going to agree with it, and it's hard to absolutely objectively say where the influence came from without asking the band themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.248.54.235 (talk) 21:18, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

PR closure

Guess the rule changed at some point without me noticing. I could've sworn that it included GANs as well at one point. dannymusiceditor Speak up! 13:39, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Re: Naruto FA

Sorry, I'll be a bit busy since I also plan to nominate D.Gray-man to FA once its copyedit is finished. Still, I'll go to Naruto's FAR. Good luck in the article.Tintor2 (talk) 14:59, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

By the way, before nominating Naruto to FA, I recommend you to add free images from Wikicommons and have them related to the prose. It's an advise a user gave me. Also, the first issue of the Weekly Shonen Jump that published Naruto in Japan might count as a good nonfree image. I think I once found it while searching the 10th anniversary guidebook, but I lost it.Tintor2 (talk) 23:42, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
@Tintor2: You mean like changing the infobox image? MCMLXXXIX 23:49, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
No, but adding it the magazine cover to the manga section.Tintor2 (talk) 23:55, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
@Tintor2: You mean this image? MCMLXXXIX 00:08, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Yep.Tintor2 (talk) 00:45, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

  Done Let me know what you think. MCMLXXXIX 02:16, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
@Tintor2: I'm abandoning the adding images thing. Some dude keeps removing them, and I'm not fighting them over it. MCMLXXXIX 02:43, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Just a favor

Great work on the Naruto-related articles and I wish you luck in improving them further for a possible Featured Topic nomination. In any case I have a small favor to ask you: could you take a look at the article Maon Kurosaki and leave comments on its peer review? Thank you. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:26, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations

 
BarnSakura for excellent edits

I hereby award you the Anime and Manga BarnSakura your amazing edits to Naruto and List of Naruto episodes. I look forward to seeing more of your work.Tintor2 (talk) 23:35, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Aoba seem to be pointing that.Tintor2 (talk) 13:40, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

@Tintor2: Not really. MCMLXXXIX 15:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

March 2017 WikiCup newsletter

And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:

  •   Cas Liber, last year's winner, led the field with two featured articles on birds and a total score of 674.
  •   Iry-Hor, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with a featured article, a good article and a tally of 282 bonus points for a score of 517. All these points came from the article Nyuserre Ini, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh,
  •   1989, another WikiCup newcomer, was in joint third place at 240. 1989 has claimed points for two featured lists and one good article relating to anime and comedy series, all of which were awarded bonus points.
  •   Peacemaker67 shared third place with five good articles and thirteen good article reviews, mostly on naval vessels. He is also new to the competition.

The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.

So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:51, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Concern re. Naruto FAC

Hi - I'm not sure if you've seen my comment on the Naruto FAC yet - has the scholarly literature been surveyed for this article? --122.108.141.214 (talk) 09:31, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Does it need to? MCMLXXXIX 23:38, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
The featured article criteria state that articles should be well-researched - "a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature. Claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate". If the scholarly literature has not been surveyed to find out if there's anything useful, is the article well-researched? --122.108.141.214 (talk) 23:51, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes. MCMLXXXIX 00:38, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks - I've upgraded my initial comment to a formal oppose based on your information. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 00:55, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Naruto uzumaki

Try searching in google books. Considering how famous is the character there must be something.Tintor2 (talk) 12:04, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Corrected translation of "Vobiscum Christianus" undone!

I do not know who translated Jozef De Kesel's motto "Vobiscum Christianus" as "with Christian", but when I corrected the translation to "Christian with you", it was undone because it did not appear constructive. To whom? To someone who does not know Latin? Ah, I just checked, and indeed Google Translate supplies this incorrect translation!

The correct translation indicates that the bishop is a christian together with the rest of us. The reversal to "with Christian" is not just an incorrect translation, but makes no sense as a motto.

OK, I figure my unknown IP address has no authority, but just look at the bishop's own facebook page https://www.facebook.com/pg/jozefdekesel/about/ where he translates it into the Dutch equivalent of "with you I am christian" 173.8.157.198 (talk) 19:38, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Naruto

 On 7 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Naruto, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Masashi Kishimoto has a five-step process for drawing the characters for the manga Naruto? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Naruto. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Naruto), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Rectifying paragraphs for the Naruto franchise

Hello, 1989. Did you know that I am rectifying all paragraphs for the Naruto anime television series and feature films. Can you please thank me after I am done with most episodes? Thank you. It's Rectify 54. Are you proud of me? (talk) 14:05, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

No thanks. Making the plot sections shorter is not rectifying anything. You're actually doing the opposite. MCMLXXXIX 14:14, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Naruto character article research

All six chapters, or just one? --122.108.141.214 (talk) 22:43, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Part of my concern is that there are two editors, but in the book many chapters are authored by different people - so it's important to cite the specific chapters by the different people. Half of the book is about the Naruto series - it helps the readers' confidence in the article if references are full and specific. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 22:53, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Try using this as an example:
  • Ehmcke, Franziska (2013). "The Traditional Naruto (Maelstrom) Motif in Japanese Culture". In Berndt, Jacqueline; Kümmerling-Meibauer, Bettina (eds.). Manga's Cultural Crossroads. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. pp. 216–217. ISBN 978-1-134-10283-9.

--122.108.141.214 (talk) 22:55, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Looks good! Can you please 'a,b,c' the Ehmcke reference using a tool? --122.108.141.214 (talk) 23:19, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

About Abdulmalik Surajo Malumfashi

Abdulmaleek Was His Real Name And He Had Graduated His Primary School Tunau Primary And He Is In The Way To Bayero University Kano State Nigeria — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aminu Sa'eed (talkcontribs) 19:37, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

The Great Gatsby: Music from Baz Luhrmann's Film

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article The Great Gatsby: Music from Baz Luhrmann's Film has been completed.

Just a "heads up". I had occasion in the Songs section to check a number of citations to make sense of some of the sentences and found that parts of a number of them had been used without quotation marks being employed. While the article may be of GA quality, somebody needs to check each song's description against the citations used to be sure there are no other instances of this. I'm sure this would result in an automatic fail.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:12, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

One Piece

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article One Piece has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Good luck with the GAN.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:38, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

The Great Gatsby: Music from Baz Luhrmann's Film

Hello:

I would suggest that, as primary contributor, you rework the article to meet the reviewer's expectations. I'd be happy to copy edit the result. Regards. Twofingered Typist (talk) 18:46, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

@Twofingered Typist: Sure thing. Before you go offline, could you copyedit the lead for this FLC candidate? MCMLXXXIX 18:48, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm actually working on List of One Piece characters from the GOCE requests page as we "speak". There's a March drive to clear up a huge backlog of requests. I'll try to have a look at it over the next few days.Twofingered Typist (talk) 18:59, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
I see the article has passed GA, congratulations. I have copy edited the Critical Reception section where you made changes. Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:56, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

GAN

Hey 1989,

When you get the chance, could you review Mercy Point for GA? I have just recently completely rewrote and expanded the article, and I believe that it is in good shape. Thank you either way! Aoba47 (talk) 15:44, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

@Aoba47: I'm not experienced with doing GAN reviews, so I'm unable to review it unfortunately. -- MCMLXXXIX 16:17, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
  • No worries, thank you for your response. Aoba47 (talk) 23:57, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

List of One Piece characters

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article List of One Piece characters has been completed.

A couple of observations:

Not all of the characters include information on who voiced them in the Japanese and English animes. I suspect that an FL candidate would require this to be considered complete.
The section on Buggy includes information on the character's approval ratings and also reviewers' commentaries. For the most part this information is not provided for the other characters. I guess you have the option of adding this to the other characters' descriptions or removing it from this one for consistency. This could almost be the basis of a stand alone article - Popularity and Reception of One Piece characters.
You should clarify why these characters have been chosen. Is every character in each group included? If not have only the most important been chosen? etc...

Good luck with the FLN.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:55, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Scholarly literature for One Piece

Hi - I found this:

You might like to add it to the One Piece article. It looks like it discusses heroic themes in One Piece. Hope this helps! --122.108.141.214 (talk) 03:29, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Naruto Uzumaki

Congratulations on making Naruto Uzumaki become a FA. It must have been tiring, but you did a great work. Now there are more FAs from the Anime and Manga Project thanks to you. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 00:52, 10 April 2017 (UTC) ───────────────────────── Great work on Naruto's promotion to FA. Congratulations! I assume you have similar designs on other characters in the Naruto franchise.    — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 07:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Naruto FAC review request

Hi there: I'm happy to look through the article, although it might take some time as it is obviously quite a big subject. In the meantime, I have currently nominated Yuri on Ice for "Did You Know?", so if you want to give that a quick exam in the meantime that would be nice. ISD (talk) 08:34, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Source and image review section

I've removed your request for now as we tend to keep this for articles that have been at FAC longer and are close to promotion with a few supports. Thanks, Sarastro1 (talk) 22:26, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

@Sarastro1: How long does the FAC need to be for a requested source review? -- 1989 22:28, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Usually when it has around three supports, or when the coordinators leave a note on the FAC page. This doesn't mean that source and image reviews can't be done before then, they can be done anytime, and you can always ask one of the reviewers to handle these without having to put a note on WT:FAC. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:30, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
@Sarastro1: My FAC has three supports... -- 1989 22:32, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes, but I'd really like to see a greater depth of review before we start to think in terms of promotion. There is not much detailed commentary on criteria 1a, 1b and 1c. And the review has been open for 3 days. It is extraordinarily unlikely that a FAC review is anywhere near promotion in such a short time, and we tend to leave them open for around 2 weeks, give or take a day or two, to allow for more review. We don't close them the instant there are 3 supports; this has always been a minimum requirement, not the prerequisite number of votes for promotion. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:36, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

BTW - not trying to give you grief, just provide a more in-depth review for the article. Why did you decide to ask for indefinite semi-protection again? --122.108.141.214 (talk) 02:09, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Besides you, the IP and new user disruptive edits have been ridiculous, and I don't want reviewers (including myself) to waste time babysitting. -- 1989 02:12, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry to hear that that's been your impression. However, I think that if you tallied up the month's worth of edits you'd find that most of the IP edits have been helpful (or helpful-in-spirit, like adding the date of the conclusion prematurely), and that the main disruptors have been those who will not be stopped by semi-protection - people who register to vandalise. Several of the most unconstructive edits have been undone by robots, and thus haven't been impinging on people. I found another really good resource on NARUTO via EBSCOhost - I think you'll really like it for the article. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 04:55, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Trust me, if the PC protection was worthwhile, the admin would of declined my request, but that wasn't the case. It's not the end of the world. You could comment on the FAC about what needs to be changed, and after it closes, you could go to the talk page and do the same thing. In fact, why not create an account? You've been recommended by multiple users (including myself) to make one. You could be a good asset to the project. Also, if the semi won't stop them, then extended protection would be needed, but I don't think there's a need for that level at this moment. Thanks for the source, I'll should be able to look at it soon. -- 1989 11:31, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

───────────────────────── They might have also just accepted your report rather than look at the edits. It's not the end of the world, but it is very disappointing for 'the encyclopedia anyone can edit' for an article of genuine interest to teens to go protected against newbies and dabblers for as many years as it has been, and to be indefinitely reinstated after only a month based on an impression rather than the evidence. Generally speaking, IP editors are positive contributors to articles - if you bar them, then you lose out on copyeditors and you lose out on subject matter experts of one stripe or another. The main people who have been vandalising the article over the month have been those who will create an account just to vandalise, and they won't be going away any time soon - why should genuine contributors be penalised for that? --122.108.141.214 (talk) 21:04, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Your right. Some IP editors and new users are helpful, while others are not so much. You make good points, but situations like articles being protected indefinitely hasn't been the first and it won't be the last. Popular topics like Naruto are constantly corrupted by random people, and admins can't just let the page take the abuse because there are some IP editors and new users that make helpful edits. In fact, Naruto was temporarily protected multiple times before an admin decided to protect it indefinitely. It even had PC protection before. Click View history of Naruto and click "view logs of this page" under the header. There have been many chances, and some people choose to ignore those chances. I don't know what else to say, I gave you an alternative above that I hope you will consider someday. 1989 21:35, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
It's not just some IP editors who are helpful. I think that if you look at the edit patterns, you'll see that it's most. Naruto is a popular topic - so it will attract a high volume of edits, constructive, in good faith, and vandalistic. The good done by most IP editors should outweigh the bad done by a minority of IP editors - particularly when coupled with the principle that Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. I need to shelve this for a few days because of personal commitments, but I may appeal the semi later when I can analyse the edits at leisure. I will most likely continue to support your FA nomination by nitpicking where I can. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 22:06, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. 1989 22:16, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

TFL notification

Hi, 1989. I'm just posting to let you know that Family Guy (season 4) – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for May 1. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 01:31, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

FAC Request

Hello again! I hope that you had a wonderful weekend so far. I was wondering if you could possible help me with my current FAC? I understand if you do not have the time. I would greatly appreciate your help, especially after all of the help that you have provided with my previous projects. Also, let me know if there is anything that I can do to help you with any of your projects on here. Thank you in advance! Aoba47 (talk) 17:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reconsidering and fixing up the protection level on Naruto. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 00:07, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Depth of review

Ask the FA directors if they're satisfied with the depth of the reviews you've had so far for Naruto. I'm unsure if unregistered editors are allowed to support an article for FA by voting that way. I'm a bit surprised there wasn't that much from the Spanjers chapter, but maybe a lot of that was basic information? --122.108.141.214 (talk) 22:06, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Ask them if they're happy with the depth of reviews you've had thus far for the article. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 22:13, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
@Sarastro1: -- 1989 22:26, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Have you seen these copyediting tutorials? There might be a few tips in there that could be applied to the article. Thanks for contacting the FAC people about if there's been enough depth in the reviews for Naruto - I'd rather leave it open until we hear back from them as to if the article needs to be explicitly analysed more. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 21:28, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Scarlett Johansson

Referring to your revert, Ingrid is actually her middle name, it seems as shown here. Gunnerfreak from Puzzle Pirates : Talk to me 12:47, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Wipeout 2048

Hi 1989, if you have the time would you mind giving a source review for the Wipeout 2048 FAC? I recalled that you didn't enjoy leaving prose reviews! My previous FAC failed, but I think the only thing it's missing right now is a source review, and after that it should possibly pass. Of course, I'll be happy to exchange reviews for anything you have up now or anytime in the future. Don't worry if you can't do it. Thanks! JAGUAR  17:00, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, but source and prose reviews aren't my thing. I only give image reviews, since I'm more experienced in that area. -- 1989 19:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

764 – Al-Hadi, Iranian caliph (d. 786)

he is Abbasid caliph not iranian https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Iran — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alifadhil85 (talkcontribs) 11:49, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations from WP:STiki!

 
The Bronze STiki Barnstar of Merit
Congratulations, 1989! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the 5,000 classification threshold using STiki.

We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool.

We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (talk) 20:11, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer

Hello 1989. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

  • URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog (around 18,000 pages) down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
  • Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
  • Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. 03:12, 28 April 2017 (UTC)– Gilliam (talk)

Yamanaka Yukimori

Why did you nominate User:Cckerberos/Yamanaka Yukimori for speedy deletion? It does not meet CSD U5, if for no other reason than that it requires the owner to have "made few or no edits outside of user pages". I've made thousands. --Cckerberos (talk) 15:41, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

I undid my nomination. My mistake. -- 1989 16:25, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Invisible edits/reviews?

Hi, 1989! Thank you for your great work on Wikipedia!

I'm confused about something that happened recently. At 11:43 UTC, on 4/28/17, I recieved two email notifications. One stated that you had edited User:Noah Kastin/Current Project, while the other stated that you had reviewed the same page. I also got a Wikipedia notification about your review of User:Noah Kastin/Current Project. However, when I checked User:Noah Kastin/Current Project's edit history, I didn't see any edits that you had made to the page. I'm also not sure if and where there is a review log or some similar thing, but I can't see any signs of reviews having taken place.

If you know what is going on and could let me know, I would greatly appreciate that!

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) 06:50, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

@Noah Kastin: I don't know, I guess the edit notification meant that I patrolled your pages page, and the review notification meant that I reviewed them it as well. So... I did both, with Page Curation. -- 1989 14:53, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
@1989: Thanks for the prompt reply, and for the link to Page Curation! I have a couple of questions:
  1. What exactly are "patrolling" and "reviewing" pages? (Somehow, I didn't pick that up from the Page Curation page.)
  2. You mentioned patrolling "[my] pages" and reviewing "them" as well. Does this mean that you patrolled and reviewed multiple pages related to me? (The only page that I was aware of you patrolling and reviewing related to me is User:Noah Kastin/Current Project.)
Thanks again for the reply and link!
Noah Kastin (talk) 02:10, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
@Noah Kastin:
1. See WP:NPR and WP:PATROL.
2. No, it was just that one page.
-- 1989 02:53, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
@1989: Thanks for clearing up the issue about how many pages you patrolled and reviewed, and for the new links!
Just to make sure: If someone "patrols" and "reviews" an article, does that just remove it from a list of articles that need to be patrolled and reviewed? (Sorry to ask again, but I really want to make sure that I understand what's going on.)
As an aside: You might want to mark the areas where you changed a couple of phrases with strikethrough, underline, and a new timestamp, per WP:REDACT. It probably won't cause a problem if you don't make these changes, but just in case someone stumbles across this page and wonders why I quoted you as saying something that you didn't say, it would probably help if there were some explanation.
Thanks again for the clarification and links!
Noah Kastin (talk) 06:43, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes and your welcome. -- 1989 12:47, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

List of One Piece chapters (187–388)

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article List of One Piece chapters (187–388) has been completed.

Good luck with the FLC.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:10, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

List of One Piece chapters (389-594)

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article List of One Piece chapters (389-594) has been completed.

Good luck with the FLC.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:35, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

List of One Piece chapters (1–186) copyedit


May 2017 WikiCup newsletter

The second round of the competition has now closed, with just under 100 points being required to qualify for round 3. YellowEvan just scraped into the next round with 98 points but we have to say goodbye to the thirty or so competitors who didn't achieve this threshold; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Our top scorers in round 2 were:

  •   Cas Liber, led the field with five featured articles, four on birds and one on astronomy, and a total score of 2049, half of which came from bonus points.
  •   1989 was in second place with 826 points, 466 of which were bonus points. 1989 has claimed points mostly relating to anime and Japanese-related articles.
  •   Peacemaker67 took third place with two FAs, one GA and seven GARs, mostly on naval vessels or military personnel, scoring 543 points.
  • Other contestants who scored over 400 points were Freikorp, Carbrera, and Czar. Of course all these points are now wiped out and the 32 remaining contestants start again from zero in round 3.

Vivvt submitted the largest number of DYKs (30), and MBlaze Lightning achieved 13 articles at ITN. Carbrera claimed for 11 GAs and Argento Surfer performed the most GARs, having reviewed 11. So far we have achieved 38 featured articles and a splendid 132 good articles. Commendably, 279 GARs have been achieved so far, more than double the number of GAs.

So, on to the third round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

198.136.146.20

198.136.146.20 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) deleted that content again. I noticed that you left the anon a v4im warning. I have observed when I report someone with a single warning such as that, the editor is usually not blocked and the AIV report is eventually removed as stale. If you wish to report, please do. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 04:20, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Review my article?

Seeing that you're a new page reviewer, any chance you could review my article Murders of Chris Kyle and Chad Littlefield? Thanks. THE DIAZ talkcontribs 22:46, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@The Diaz: I'm sorry, but how did you see? -- 1989 23:22, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia says that you're a new page reviewer. THE DIAZ talkcontribs 23:32, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
@The Diaz: Oh. Well, since you may have found me at random, I'm not comfortable with reviewing articles right now. Sorry. -- 1989 23:38, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Tetsuya Nishio

I wrote Draft:Tetsuya Nishio to help fill in the gap - I hope it fits with the criteria for inclusion. There don't seem to be many other character designers who are notable for simply being character designers. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 13:20, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Sandbox Review

So I saw in my notifications that my sandbox was reviewed by you. Could you explain what happened? Did I request a review? I honestly don't remember.(my memory isn't up to par)

Also, did you find any issues about it? How could I add to it? Thanks, Zhangj1079 (T|C|c) 20:55, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

No, I'm sure you didn't request a review of your sandbox. I too was surprised that find that 1989 had reviewed my User:Dan Harkless/Userboxes page (though a review of my sandbox would have struck me as even more odd). Per Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers § Userpage/sandbox patrols, there's a large backlog of newly created userpages to be patrolled, and per User talk:1989/Archive 1 § New page reviewer, 1989 was recently made a page reviewer, so I guess they're working on the backlog, ensuring that user pages don't violate Wikipedia:User pages Wikipedia-related-content-only requirements. I don't think 1989 actually reviewed the content of your article-destined sandbox, just confirmed that it was Wikipedia-related. --Dan Harkless (talk) 00:00, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
@Dan Harkless. Thanks for explaining your theory on what happened. Looking at what you said and the links you posted, looks like you're correct. I'm not exactly well informed with things pertaining to these, so I was confused. Thanks for the clarification Dan! --Zhangj1079 (T|C|c) 01:07, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Sasuke Uchiha

I've been trying to add more reception information to Sasuke Uchiha but I don't know any of the sources you used in Naruto Uzumaki. I guess more reviews from Boruto's manga and movie could be used based on his role in them. Additionally, I'm not native English speaker so feel free to nominate the article to FA if you want. Also, a shame Naruto couldn't become a FA, but there's always a second chance. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 00:46, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Archiving Wikipedia talk pages of old events

I'm not sure why you're archiving Wikipedia talk pages of old events like AC elections. You've made a bunch of unnecessary edits and in some cases made the pages harder to read by breaking them into multiple archives. You're also clogging watchlists by making the edits one by one. Only talk pages that are active really need to be archived. –xenotalk 13:35, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

@Xeno: I'm just trying to clear this out. My apologies if I'm causing disruption. Plus, it's difficult to archive everything from my mobile device, that's why I use a script which does it one by one. -- 1989 13:37, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
1989, ditto for archiving discussions on article talk pages such as Talk:Isaaq genocide. The WP:TITLE and content is still actively under discussion as the title alone is problematic. There has been no definitive outcome, therefore it's too early to even leave an AfD nomination section at the top of the talk page. While one-click archiver can be useful, I understand that it's tempting to get carried away. Please try to exercise a little more discretion when 'cleaning up' talk pages. Thanks for your understanding. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
@Iryna Harpy: I don't archive anything too recent, the discussions I archived had a last response from three months old, and were collapsed. If it's still active, then please archive it when it's over. 1989 21:01, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
I was also wondering why you would remove a request for images that was only three weeks old, leaving the talk page empty. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:51, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
@Cordless Larry: Since no one responded, and it's almost a month old, I thought it was eligible. 1989 21:01, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
I would leave it for much longer than that. The likelihood of someone seeing a request on a relatively new page and providing the requested photos within a month is pretty slim. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:03, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Admittedly, some images have been added since the message was posted, but I would still leave it in place for a while yet. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:06, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
...especially because they look to be copyright violations. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:09, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Deleting G13 notices

It isn't necessary to delete the G13 notices for expired drafts that you have tagged that I had originally moved from a sandbox into draft space. It just results in alerts to me that I have to research to see what happened, and I already know how G13 works and that I wasn't the originator of the drafts that I moved from sandboxes. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

The editor you do have to notify is the editor who originally submitted the draft. This is not done automatically by the program, and must be done manually. Iti s also a good idea to notify any reviewer who previously potponed deletio nof the article--they may well choose to do it again.
I'd also suggest that you not do quite as many at a time. Tagging G13 is not automatic. You need to first check that the article does not show enough promise that the deletion should be postponed--or even is good enough that it would probably pass afd, which is the criterion for moving into main space. Don't assume previous reviews are accurate00you will find draft declined for reasons that do not apply, such as bas English, or the failure to have inline references on an article that is not a BLP. For such reasons, consider either accepting the draft, or postponing the G13.
When you do add the G13, check to see that there are not other applicable reasons: the most likely ones are copyvio, and advertising Ifthey apply, you should list these reasons also. This will prevent the accidental restoration of the article by request of the contributor. Of the ones you hacw narjed, about 10% should not have been deleted, and at least another 10 or 15% tagged with additional reasons. You may be relying on th deleting admin to check these things. don't; some admins are, U egret to say, have the tendency to act so fast as to be careless, or even act under the mistaken belef that everything there for 6 months ought to be deleted regardless of merit. You need to help us admins out-doin gdeletions right requries 12 good people to look carefull yat each article.
I was able to rescue a few of what you deleted, but there were simply too many to look at. That shouldn't happen. I am quiteprepared to look at many dozens of articles a day, but I can not do hundreds, DGG ( talk ) 08:59, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
I see. I'll make sure to improve when reviewing expired AfCs in the future. 1989 10:25, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
@DGG: I looked at some of the drafts you rejected, and I see that your main reason is the subject is notable. I even saw one where it was postponed now three times and the creator has not edited in two years. Is those drafts kept hoping someone will improve them in the future, and they don't apply to G13? 1989 10:47, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
I and others have long lists of things to work on. In the past, there was at least a bot that give a month's advance notification, but it has not run in the last year. But the intention is to get there eventually. I've been here for 11 years,and o ver that time, a great many articles are eventually worked on. Furthermore, wit is quite difficult for someone to search and see that there is a draft, and impossible to find a deleted draft, which makes for difficulties in finding the material, and gives and addition reason for keeping them. DGG ( talk ) 00:47, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Naruto and Sasuke's character designs

When searching for reception, I found this site that has the three main designs for both Naruto and Sasuke in a single image. What do you think about it? Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 20:25, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

@Tintor2: It's ok. You want to replace the main image with them and remove the other images? -- 1989 12:52, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure where to add it though. In the infobox or another act as a replacement for another image.Tintor2 (talk) 18:07, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

One-account restriction rescinded

User:1989, formerly known as User:Blurred Lines, has been subject to a one-account restriction since 2014. Following a successful appeal to the Arbitration Committee, the one-account restriction for 1989  is rescinded. They are reminded that any alternate accounts and/or bots must adhere to WP:SOCK#LEGIT and WP:BOTPOL. Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:13, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Naruto

Hi -- just a quick note to say I'm still planning to work on Naruto, but it'll probably be this coming weekend, at least, before I can get to it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:04, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

GOCE: Naruto (season 1)


Convergent Design

You informed me that the article was going to be deleted, but five seconds after receiving your email, I discovered that it was already gone. I would like to work on it. I responded to both the Wikipedian who deleted it and the space where it was deleted. Maybe you can help me, as nobody has responded to me? I failed to make a copy of my Wikipedia article on Convergent Design and would not want to start over from scratch. So I would appreciate any help you can give me on this. Patty Mooney (talk) 22:49, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

@Anthony Bradbury: -- 1989 18:26, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
You will presumably appreciate that this draft, which had not been submitted or accepted as a main space article, was deleted (by me) after no work had been done on it for six months. Perhaps you had overlooked the fact that a draft has to be submitted? I will restore the draft for you to work on, but if not submitted it will ultimately be deleted again.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 19:18, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Boruto

Due to last movie and new series, I think Boruto Uzumaki could be given his own article but I can't find anything about his creation. Guess Kodachi left him on secret for now. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 22:31, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Boruto Uzumaki

I recently created Boruto Uzumaki due to all the reception I found. Feel free to edit or do whatever you want with it. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 01:54, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Since it was recently created, I made a DYK here Template:Did you know nominations/Boruto Uzumaki. Could you check if it has a grammar mistake or you think it can have a better line? Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 14:07, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
@Tintor2: In the film, Boruto stated that he would want to assist Sarada if she were to become the Hokage. He didn't say anything about him helping Naruto. Also, I don't know how Naruto was annoying towards Boruto (if that's what you meant), since he wasn't really involved in his life after he was promoted to being the Hokage. -- 1989 15:48, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Changed. Guess I was confused with the manga where he tells the kid he bodyguards about how he wishes to assist the Hokage.Tintor2 (talk) 15:53, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Note on indenting

Hi -- I noticed you've been indenting the way I used to before someone explained to me how it works, so I thought I'd pass along the same information I was given. To indent from a previous comment, you're supposed to repeat the previous indent exactly, and then add either a colon or an asterisk, depending on whether you want a bullet point or not. Like so:

  • Comment with a bullet -- indented with *
    Followup comment with no bullet -- indented with *:
    • Another followup, this time with a bullet -- indented with *:*

If you don't do this, it usually works out OK, but sometime you can get weird multi-bullet effects, like so:

  • Comment with a bullet -- indented with *
    Followup comment with no bullet -- indented with *:
    • Another followup, this time with a bullet -- indented with *:*
        • Here you get three bullets for some reason -- indented with ****

I hope that's useful. By the way, do let me know if you disagree with anything I'm doing on Naruto; I hope I haven't made a mess of anything yet. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:53, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Dragon Ball (manga)

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Dragon Ball (manga) has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Good luck with the GAR.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Sasuke Uchiha

I managed to reach Sasuke Uchiha's 101 references. I don't know if you are interested in taking to FA, but I can request at least a copyedit since one of the three articles I requested was copyedited. Still, I have no scholar information which might seem important like Naruto Uzumaki's article. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 23:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm not interested right now, but you could request it anyway. -- 1989 18:38, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Requested the copyedit though. I found one interview with Sugiyama but the translator didn't say where it came from. Good luck with Boruto's article.Tintor2 (talk) 00:12, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Re: Naruto

I have no idea but there is a user from the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga that knows most of the dates. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 01:57, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

FAC

Hi -- I'm at work and can't really spend any more time posting till this evening; I'll respond tonight if you don't get to it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:52, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Just curious

The Part II image from Sasuke Uchiha is colored but I don't remember Kishimoto illustrated that. Was it done by Shueisha (heard they also illustratted older images like the ones from Dragon Ball and Gintama). If is it true, is there a website that might have them? Anyway, good work with Naruto. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 19:49, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Also, I found another interview here which the translator says it's from the 4th databook, but I don't know its pages number. It has info about how Kishimoto decided Minato would be Naruto's late father as well as how he designs most characters.Tintor2 (talk) 23:41, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Reddit. -- 1989 16:33, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

FAC

1989, if you find some time, would you mind taking a look at this? Thanks either way. NumerounovedantTalk 07:44, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

I'll look soon. -- 1989 16:34, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Re: Naruto Guidebook

Thanks. Still, I found the pages when searching for scanlations that pointed an index. It helped to increase some character articles most notably Gaara. By the way, the Naruto wikia posted this interview where Kishimoto talks a lot about the series, but I can't find the official interview. Nevertheless, good luck with the Naruto FAC. I commented on two FACs so that at least two users would comment on Naruto's. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 16:12, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I would add some to Sasuke's article but there is a copyeditor working on it.Tintor2 (talk) 17:46, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
By the way, I noticed you added a Boruto manga reference to Boruto Uzumaki's article. Do you have the first volume? It might contain info about Ukyō Kodachi and the artist (Mikemoto?) that could be used in Boruto: Naruto Next Generations considering how small is that section. Ukyō Kodachi also has a good article in Japanese wikipedia but I can't understand a single thing. Also, I added a free image to Sasuke's article about the uchiwa but I want to know your approval. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 22:15, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
No I don't. When I get a chance, I'll look over the Kodachi article to see what I can find. I have no issue with the image. -- 1989 15:19, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for bothering you but I can't find a decent colored shot of Orochimaru. By any chance did Shueisha digitally color one? It could easily replace the current one. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 17:53, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

I'll be sure to update the image if I can find one. -- 1989 15:19, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Harry Potter Goblet of Fire Edit

Hi - my edit didn't appear constructive? David Tennant played a large role in this film, yet his inclusion is not there on the film's page and it should be.

James — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.63.192 (talkcontribs)

Congrats!

  The Original Barnstar
Amazing word at making Naruto become FA. This might be a great impact to the project of manga and anime. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 16:22, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Dragon Ball (manga)

Good job! Sagecandor (talk) 19:29, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

TFL notification

Hi, 1989. I'm just posting to let you know that List of Naruto chapters (Part II, volumes 49–72) – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for August 21. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 01:25, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Lars

By any chance have you ever played Ultimate Ninja Storm 2? After holidays and playing Tekken 6 whose main character is Lars Alexandersson I decided to work on it. I also requested it to be copyedited in the guild before a GA nomination. Could you give it a look? Cheers and congratulations on your work Naruto again. By the way, a fact of Boruto made it to the main page today.Tintor2 (talk) 01:39, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm not into video games. Speaking of Lars, why is the Naruto template on the article? The character is not involved in the franchise. Being a guest on one of the video games does not count. -- 1989 02:42, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Archiving

Please don't blank talk pages like this. The last four to five discussions should always be left on the talk page. Blanking talk pages on articles gives the impression that no discussion ever occurred on the page. —Farix (t | c) 03:07, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

That's the whole point of archiving, to keep talk pages clean. There's an archive box right there. That alone should be enough. -- 1989 03:11, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
The point of archiving isn't to "keep talk pages clean". The point of archiving is to reduce how much someone has to scroll down the page to see the most recent discussions. You can't achieve that by removing all discussions. —Farix (t | c) 10:39, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
The only "discussions" that were on the talk page was a bot message from months ago, and a GA review that was closed as successful. Keeping a bot message and a closed GA review is not worth proof that the talk page is still alive. I already mentioned the archive box. -- 1989 12:41, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Leaving the last few talk page discussions on the page, even if they happen to be years old, can still help users evaluate the quality of the article they're reading (particularly on mobile devices, where it is harder to navigate to the archives). If the only edits are from ages ago, then people aren't necessarily talking about the article. If the only edits are robots fixing dead links, then the article might be outdated, or if people dismiss information needs as being 'irrelevant', then perhaps the article might be lacking in WP:NPOV. The kinds of conversations people have about the content of the article can be very useful for people who are learning to evaluate Wikipedia's quality. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 03:15, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations

Congratulations on the Naruto FA! --122.108.141.214 (talk) 03:15, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. -- 1989 03:55, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Image for deletion

I recently removed this image from Lars' article but I don't how to request speedy deletion. Also, PhoenixGod added a new Orochimaru image that shows his entire body but sadly it's black and white. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 21:16, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

One Piece FA?

Hey, there. First of all, I would like to commend you on your efforts in making Naruto an FA; I've also been frequent contributor on the article myself. Given that I've also worked on other anime-related articles such as One Piece and Dragon Ball, both of which are now GA, I'm thinking about joining forces to get the One Piece article up to FA status. If it does succeed, our possible objective is to list it as a TFA on the anime's 20th anniversary, October 20, 2019, or earlier. Do you have any ideas on what we should do? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

@Sjones23: I would take a look at Talk:One Piece/GA2, since the reviewer did put some concerns which evolved around the small sections that would need to be resolved before taking it to FAC. I don't plan on working on it any further after GA (at least not now), as I wanted that status to be restored. The only thing it needs is expansion and another copyedit, and it should be fine. -- 1989 03:24, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. Best wishes, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:47, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Jill Valentine

Hello. You previously supported my FAC for Jill Valentine. While the original nomination did receive seven supports on prose, two unfinished reviews opposed on issues of sourcing and comprehensiveness, and the nomination was closed. After a series of improvements I have now renominated the article; see here. Your comments would be most welcome. Cheers. Freikorp (talk) 02:33, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Steven Universe

  Hello! Your submission of Steven Universe at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:51, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Monkey D. Luffy copyedit


DYK nomination of Steven Universe

  Hello! Your submission of Steven Universe at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 11:19, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Sasuke's description

Since I requested Lenalee Lee to be copyedited, I noticed you also requested Sasuke Uchiha to be given this treatment. Still, shouldn't it be given a character traits section like Naruto's? How about this

"Sasuke is introduced in Part I as a young spiky black-haired teenager who mostly wears a blue shirt with a fan representing his clan in his back. He also wears short white pants as well as a Konohagakure's head band. Across the series, a man named Orochimaru gives Sasuke a cursed seal that gives him multiple black marks that cover his body. In late Part I and Part II, Sasuke receives a new Cursed Seal powers which makes his skin gray and his hair white while at the same time claw-like wings. In Part II, he appears wearing a white kimono with black pants. While skilled in the use of shurikens, Sasuke starts wielding in Part II a chokuto sword which he calls Kusanagi.

Across the series, Sasuke is shown as silent character who seeks to become stronger regardless of methods in order to kill his older brother Itachi Uchiha who murdered his entire clan. Nevertheless, Sasuke is shocked about how Naruto Uzumaki wants to make him peace with the village. As a result, Sasuke considers Naruto as the only friend he never had. By the end of the series as well as the sequel, Sasuke has become more kindhearted but decides not to return to his home due as his own way redeeming himself and at the same time search for an enemy that might ruin Konohagakure's peace.(699 & Gaiden)"

Since my native language is not, this might requiring some copyedit. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 23:44, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Image review request

Hi 1989. If you have the time would you be willing to give a quick image review for the Nights: Journey of Dreams FAC? I remember you saying a while ago that you only gave out image reviews. Thanks. JAGUAR  19:32, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@Jaguar: I'll review it soon. Good to see you back. -- 1989 22:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Archiving and FAR

What does archiving have to do with FAR? Not to mention that all of them are archived elsewhere so in case if they will die you can still bring them back and with a newer copy.--Biografer (talk) 00:28, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

@Biografer: I can see that you have zero knowledge when it comes to Featured Articles, so let me clarify what I said. Please see this, the nomination it took for the article to get where it had (before your changes). If one or multiple refs are dead, and no one is there to give an archive link, the article will go to WP:FAR, a place where featured articles are placed if it does not meet FA standards anymore (e.g. multiple dead links). In case you haven't noticed, this is a WP:VOLUNTEER service, meaning anyone at any time who was deeply involved in a topic would leave and will not be able to fix the issues in time. The edits you are doing is damaging, and you need to revert what you have done, as you are not being helpful at all in that instance. If you think a ref is alive and not dead, add the parameter |deadurl=no or changed the word yes to no if it already exists. Thanks. -- 1989 00:40, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
@Biografer: Even Tintor2 (someone who is deeply involved with the article) restored what you had destroyed. Please don't make any further edits like what you did to the article. Thank you. -- 1989 00:47, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Well, I did damage ref 119, but your Tintor2 guy could have just fixed that ref rather then doing this revert. I understand that Wikipedia is a volunteer project.--Biografer (talk) 01:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
That's even worse, in which the version I restored after their edit fixed what you had broken. Sad to see you don't acknowledge what you have done wrong; thankfully for your sake you won't do it again. The next time you want to attempt a bold move, read WP:RECKLESS. Cheers. -- 1989 01:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
No, because no other ref other then that one was broken. Trentor2 should have just fixed that one ref and that's it (which was in Popularity subsection). Besides that, my edit was perfectly fine. I seen much worse reckless editors (called vandals), and if you are comparing them to me, then I expect an apology.--Biografer (talk) 02:21, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Like I've said before, please do not repeat what you have done any further, as it does not help the article in anyway shape or form. Thank you. -- 1989 02:45, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Sasuke Uchiha

I gave up on FAs since English is not my native language but you are free to do it if you want. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 20:10, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

If you want to nominate it, I'll try to assist you though.Tintor2 (talk) 21:12, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

By the way, I think this image could be used for Shikamaru Nara's article since it shows more of his body in contrast to the one used currently. I can't find it.Tintor2 (talk) 01:42, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

@Tintor2: Are you looking for an image of him with no one behind him, or you want to use that image? -- 1989 02:01, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
The latter. We could cut that image like the one used in Rock Lee or Jiraiya (Naruto) whose original images have them with other characters.Tintor2 (talk) 02:05, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
@Tintor2: Would you rather have this image but colored? --1989 02:17, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Colored seems better. Also, Orochimaru is also in need of a colored image.Tintor2 (talk) 02:21, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Naruto/Naruto Uzumaki

So are you still going to nominate either of these articles for TFA next month? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 22:32, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

No, don't plan to at the moment. -- 1989 05:14, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Image review

Hi 1989. Just a gentle reminder about Nights' image review, in case you'd forgotten. Don't worry if you're too busy! :-D JAGUAR  09:25, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

More Naruto interviews

I found this tumblr that contains a lot of information about the characters of Naruto most notably the protagonist and Hinata. There is so much that I think Hinata's article could become GA if it is given enough treatment from this interviews. By the way, I just realized Sasuke's article lacks the page numbers for the Entermix interview about how Kishimoto based his relationship with Naruto. I'm pretty sure FA reviewers will ask to add page numbers to these interviews.

By the way, I will assist you if you nominate Sasuke to FA. It's just that I was recommended not to nominate it alone after I did a peer review at Yu Kanda. Anyways, my current project is making Lenalee Lee turn into a GA but it has been almost two months since I requested its copyedit. Have fun editing. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 23:50, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

On another note, the characters list of Naruto has been added with more characters who appear very little. I mean, Kawaki, will be important and notable to include in the future, but for now there is nothing about him to add to the list (which is FA).Tintor2 (talk) 23:46, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#Sources for PreCure voice actors

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#Sources for PreCure voice actors. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 09:00, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

A favor I wanna ask you

I recently found out this interview which talks about Sasuke and Sakura's family once Naruto ended. Since you helped me in the past with getting original sources, I wonder if you could ask the author the original interview and add more to the character articles. By the way, it could also be useful to create an article for Sarada Uchiha since I noticed some reviews that talk about her. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 20:08, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Tintor2: "岸本聖史×岸本斉史 双子漫画家兄弟対談" [Seishi Kishimoto × Masashi Kishimoto twin brothers manga artist interview]. Square Enix. Archived from the original on August 7, 2016. -- 1989 20:24, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

And created Sarada Uchiha. Feel free to edit as much as you want. The only colored image I found is from the Boruto poster. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 23:09, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Found another about the Boruto series here. It is by an assistant of Kishimoto who also talks about Sarada's role in the anime.Tintor2 (talk) 22:44, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Avatar: The Last Airbender copyedit


Naruto Shippuden: Ultimate Ninja Storm 2 and Sarada Uchiha

I have been wondering if both Naruto Shippuden: Ultimate Ninja Storm 2 and Sarada Uchiha might become GAs. The former is already being copyedited but there is Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Character lists regarding a character list should be expanded and whether the plot section might be extended. In Sarada's case, I think it lacks a prose clean up due to English not being my native language and I already reached my limit in the copyeditors' request page (I think we can only add two requests at the same time). What do you think? Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 22:59, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Update: The game has been copyedited so I can request another copyedit. Wanna try Sarada's? I don't have many plans.Tintor2 (talk) 16:04, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
@Tintor2: You can request a copyedit for the article if you'd like. When I have time, I'll see what I can do. -- 1989 03:36, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
And requested. Will also nominate the Storm 2 article to GA.Tintor2 (talk) 15:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Another Boruto interview

Found this huge Boruto movie interview but I can't find its original source. It might be good not for only the characters but the movie itself. By the way, if you are interested in making a Naruto movie GA, I'll see if I can help. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 23:11, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

@Tintor2: Sorry, no luck. I found images of the pages and it was watermarked to this link. I have no experience with the social platform, so if you or someone else is familiar with it, you might be able to find the post in mid-2016 (possibly July) about it. Since it's look like they're active, I'll probably take some time to find out if they referenced the book in this post. As for writing GA work, I don't plan to work on anything else at the moment. -- 1989 00:26, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
No problem. I have just found out the interview was included with the DVD and thus managed to expand the development section about the film.Tintor2 (talk) 02:49, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Retired?

Retired? A shame, you've been doing an amazing work in Wikipedia's articles. I just had an idea about Naruto Uzumaki's article. How about replacing his Part II image with the one of him performing his Rasen Shuriken from either a colored chapter by Shueisha or a video game? I mean, even a member from CyberConnect2 makes mention of it.

Also, if you are interested, see Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 October 22#File:One Piece, Volume 1.jpg Good luck.Tintor2 (talk) 19:20, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Well kind of. What specific picture did you have in mind? – 1989 19:28, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Well, there are many. This is the one from Sage Storm 2 where the developer said it was his favorite. This is the original but I have never seen one colored in the manga.Tintor2 (talk) 19:34, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
I don't know. It could be nominated for deletion if its purpose is to show a superpower than to show they grown during Part II. Also, the links you showed me are from video games. I'm not sure if I'll be able to find it in the manga if it didn't happen in the anime. – 1989 13:19, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
No problem. By the way, I just finished the Boruto: Naruto the Movie peer review. I already asked for a peer review but I wonder if you could check it to see if it has some more issues. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 14:57, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

On this day, three years ago...

  Happy First Edit Day, 1989, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Slightlymad 08:03, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Mitsuki

I still have no plans of creating a Mitsuki article, but I found this interview where the actor of the character says somethings about the impact of voicing him. I don't have the exact source. Also @Flowerpiep: to find his/her opinion. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 16:35, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

[2]1989 (talk) 16:48, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I think I can gather reception based on ANN, IGN, and other sources but the creation information is still lacking.Tintor2 (talk) 16:57, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Starting a draft here. It still needs expansion but feel free to edit it if you want.Tintor2 (talk) 23:30, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

 Hello, 1989. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Advice needed

The article Boruto: Naruto the Movie finished copyediting. I was thinking about nominating it to GA but I'm too familiar with movies articles. A fellow user told me the reviewer might nitpick some parts of the prose though. If you have the time, could you check the article and do or advise something? Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 15:40, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI Experiences survey

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Steven Universe copyedit

@Miniapolis: Thanks for the copyediting. I recently nominated for GA, and the reviewer says the text may need to be copyyedited again. Would you comment on the GAN page?1989 (talk) 16:39, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I saw the GA page and wow, that's a lot of requested revisions. I presume that Gen. Quon saw the GOCE tag, and understands that the bar for GA is lower than for FA. It's a long article, and I gave it my best shot for three days; another copyedit needs to be by a fresh pair of eyes. Good luck and all the best, Miniapolis 20:04, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
I'd be more than happy to call in a third reviewer if my requests come across as too severe. There were just a number of prose/organization issues that I found that made me feel like another copy-edit would be best. (And of note, this is not because I think your ce job was bad, or that 1989's work is subpar or anything. It's just that I find a handful of copyedits are often needed on large, oft-visited articles like this).--Gen. Quon (Talk) 20:25, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Steven Universe

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Steven Universe you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria.   This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gen. Quon -- Gen. Quon (talk) 14:42, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Steven Universe

The article Steven Universe you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold  . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Steven Universe for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gen. Quon -- Gen. Quon (talk) 18:01, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Steven Universe

The article Steven Universe you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:Steven Universe for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gen. Quon -- Gen. Quon (talk) 20:01, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Steven Universe

  • @Baffle gab1978: There's no need to add {{cn}} templates, the material is already properly cited, and refs don't need to be repeated. -- 1989 (talk) 02:30, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
The citations in that sub-section were at the end of the lengthy paragraphs and it wasn't clear where the quotations came from; inline tags <ref name="name" />would be fine there.. I think an FAC reviewer would pick on the absence of citations there. Anyway I've moved on from that section, so I won't re-add the tags again. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:10, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Steven Universe

 On 26 December 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Steven Universe, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Steven Universe is the first Cartoon Network series created solely by a woman, Rebecca Sugar (pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Steven Universe. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Steven Universe), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 00:01, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Sketches vs. images

This a small doubt I have. When revising the Naruto third databook, I found that Naruto's, Sasuke's and Sakura's look were further explained here and here. Do you it is more important to upload the sketches rather than the finished ones? Cheers and happy holidays.Tintor2 (talk) 00:01, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Whatever you feel is best. – 1989 (talk) 00:08, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Amarte Es un Placer (album) FAC

I was wondering if you could take the time to review Amarte Es un Placer (album) which I have nominated for FA. Thanks!

Boruto and Sasuke

The article Boruto: Naruto the Movie became a GA especially thanks to Flowerpiep. Now Sasuke Uchiha had some revisions on the prose and other stuff. What do you think about it? Do you find it good to nominate it to FA? Take care.Tintor2 (talk) 21:46, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll have a look at the article when I have free time. – 1989 (talk) 00:15, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Avatar: The Last Airbenderi

Sadly i cannot continue with the c/e. Cheers' Baffle gab1978 (talk) 17:57, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Link to meta

Email me, I'll see what I can do. --Shirt58 (talk) 08:47, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Source review

Things seem to be going smoothly in Sasuke Uchiha's FA review. If you have the time, could you perform a source review? I'm pretty sure all sources are reliable so I don't think there might be issues. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 16:17, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Avatar: The Last Airbender

Hi 1989, since no-one has taken it up, I'm restarting work on your requested c/e. I'm sorry for the delay, my internet access was cut off unexpectedly. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


The Last's possibly last request...

I have been trying to expand the article The Last: Naruto the Movie using translations about the two main actors, the director's tribute and a commentary by the person behind the screenplay. I found them all here with the writer citing the last program guidebook. However, neither Flowerpiep or I know what are the pages for those part of the book so I've been wondering if you could ask the writer as usual since I have no idea how to do it. Cheers. Also, Sasuke's FAC seems to be going fine.Tintor2 (talk) 16:13, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

hey guy, so lucky to love a basketball which you too. miao~miao~

Philpeace arsi (talk) 18:09, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Sasuke Uchiha

I don't know if you keep if you are aware of this but Sasuke Uchiha but was nominated to FAC by Flowerpiep. However, there are some concerns regarding the prose and I thought you might be able to help at least on a future nomination based on your experience. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 15:33, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Naruto Uzumaki scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that Naruto Uzumaki has been scheduled as today's featured article for 2 May 2018. Please check that the article needs no polishing or corrections. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 2, 2018. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:46, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Precious

anime and manga

Thank you for quality articles around anime and manga such as Naruto Uzumaki, for FA reviewing, dealing with featured pictures, for changing image names from meaningless or ambiguous, for the fascinating images on your user page, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:28, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Jill Valentine

Hi. I see from your talk page and your contributions that you're semi-retired, so I won't take it personally if you never get around to this, or even bother responding to me. ;) You probably don't remember anyway, but you commented at Jill Valentine's first FAC nearly a year ago. There's a long and pointless back-story that I won't bore you with, but FAC3 was closed on the basis that I hadn't worked collaboratively with previous reviewers.

So... if you have a few minutes to spare any time over the next few months, would you mind looking at the Jill Valentine article and tell me if there's anything you think I could improve further? I've been informed I need to contact every previous commentator – all 20 other users – before I can re-nominate. Don't feel obliged to, though, and there's no rush—if you only get around to responding in September, chances are I'll still be discussing the article with one of those other 20 people. It's gonna be a long haul. =( Cheers. Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:03, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Naruto characters

In case you are interested, Hinata Hyuga became a GA while Jiraiya (Naruto) is during a review. User:Flowerpiep has been doing this with me and apparently we could aim for a good article topic based on all the GA articles. Feel free to pass by if you want.Tintor2 (talk) 22:37, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

 Hello, 1989. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

 Hello, 1989. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "1989/Archive 1".