User talk:Commdor/Archive 1

Holiday Card

Welcome to Wikipedia, and...

Happy Holidays from V's Shop.

Credits: This card was inspired by Macy's123, assistant of V's Shop

-- Vintei  Talk  01:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Call of Duty 4 Revamp

My intention with CoD4 was to streamline the flow of the article. I've been taught to balance "concise" with "comprehensive"—snuff the fluff, if you will. I certainly do not tolerate vandalism, and I hope that nothing in the article represents speculation. (For instance, character fates [debatable] were removed in favor of motivations and goals [provable].) I understand that it is very difficult at times to figure out what an editor is trying to accomplish, but honest ones like us can only do our best, right? Nahum Reduta (talk) 01:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

A Word of Caution

I want to remind you that edit warring is disruptive, even if you don't technically violate the three-revert rule. I have recently blocked DeathMark for edit warring; I considered blocking you, too, because of your excessive reverting. Because you seem to have decided to disengage, and even to self-revert, I'm not going to. But I want to caution you against doing this in the future. If consensus is on your side, someone else will be available to do the reverting. Thanks. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 02:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

RE from User:Penubag

You are welcome, any extra work to an article is appreciated. I mostly work on science/history related articles, but I may as well start on VGs, as those are my main hobby. Maybe when the game's released we can exchange FCs and play against each other? -- penubag  02:20, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

EDIT: This statistic says you wrote exactly 90% of the article (minor edits included):

 Comandante42	edits=70 minor=63 %of_article=90.0% first=10/22/2007 20:28  last=01/20/2008 01:20	31:02 h

-- penubag  02:30, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, we should include two units in action as the other advance wars predecessors have them. I think this image is better because it reflects the 2 new most dramatic units from the game (as the AWDS site also says). Also as another note, I won't be getting the game for a while, I don't expect when to either.

I don't know your ip address so if you check here you can just add the %points to find out what % of the article you really wrote (minor edits included). Edits to an encyclopedia are never a bad thing, you can't excess for a good cause :) -- penubag  03:08, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

No sleep for 24hrs working on a school project...that seems very rough. I can say this with confidence because I have done that numerous times; having Attention Deficet Disorder, I just cannot stay focused on my work either, usually reading games news (as you do) and checking the Smash Dojo. I know what you mean, except for the weather channel part, I can't stand that dumb drone telling me it's going to be sunny again (in California, the weather is the same). Well, best of luck -- penubag  05:08, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

So, have you got AW:DoR yet? -- penubag  05:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, at least you get the game soon though. Just hurry up and play the game and let me in on some juicy secrets. ;) -- penubag  05:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

It looks like you got the game, how is it? Can you confirm DS microphone chat with people not registered in Friends Roster? I was a bit skeptable when I read that on GameSpot. -- penubag  23:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Aw, that's a shame. I was really hoping that that review was real. An open chat to everyone met through WFC, would be really, really nice; I could spend hours on it. Oh well, atleast you say the game's good, I'll go fix the article. Thanks. -- penubag  01:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

No wonder, I was wondering what happened. -- penubag  01:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

You are really on top of things, unlike me. -- penubag  01:31, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

DeathMark Fiasco

No need to worry, a page protection will never happen, if anything he would get blocked for violating WP:3RR. The sources provided does say strategy, I think this because tactics and strategy are such a generic term (actually synonyms). I've yet to read the corresponding articles, but I suggest you take a picture of the box and upload it. That'll keep him quiet for a while if the only thing he is saying is "Nintendo knows more about their game than you", obviously a boxart picture will stop him. -- penubag  00:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Good, let's see how he can counter that. It was okay to upload it to WP because it was for a good purpose. It might be a good idea to move it externally because once our point has been proven, the image no longer has any purpose. I really think, though, that TBS and TBT are the exact same thing, they both show Advance Wars as an example games. Just 2 articles were created, for some reason, there was a disscussion, and the community decided the difference between the two. "Turn-based tactics games, in their pure form, do not feature resource-gathering, production, base-building or economic management, instead focusing on tactical and operational aspects of warfare such as unit formations or the exploitation of terrain for tactical advantage. Tactical role-playing games are a part of this genre. " That's a little vague don't you think? I think I'll post a requests for merger on the two articles, if you agree (I'm not as much in to the gaming world as you, so...suggestions?)-- penubag  01:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, great, I'll get to work on that. Thanks for your support. -- penubag  01:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

The merge is being discussed here-- penubag  02:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

thanks! -- penubag  03:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the barnstar, it is very much appreciated, I have reported Deathmark for violating the 3RR rule. He will be blocked, so carry on without being stressed. I will merge the articles ASAP but unfortunately, I will be gone from the computer for a while, so the merging may have to wait.Done-I actually found some time Untill then, it will remain as tactics, as his new evidence is not as good as yours. Thanks again, Comandante, it is a pleasure to work with you. -- penubag  01:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

EDIT: He has been blocked by an administrator. Please casually carry on, and don't feel offended by him. -- penubag  02:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, well the merger didn't work out. They were able to dish out their sources and proved to me that TBT and TBS are different genres... So AW:DoR will remain as TBT. -- penubag  22:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'll make sure it is resolved, if it isn't already -- penubag  00:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Question

Which other Advance Wars game do you have besides DoR?-- penubag  (talk) 01:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

That's cool, I just wanted to know so you could tell me which one is your favorite. Maybe you only had DoR, I wasn't sure. So which one is the best one in the series? -- penubag  (talk) 01:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I only have AWDS, DoR will be a little later for me. At least you sound better then some of the reviews I've heard. Thanks for replying. -- penubag  (talk) 02:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay ;). Random question: what internet browser are you using? -- penubag  (talk) 02:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I could install some scripts onto your userspace if you want. I think you'll like the clock function, adminhighliters, and user count features. The Quick Preview feature is my favorite, but it doesn't work with IE. Are you interested or not, I think they'll greatly help, although I'm perfectly fine if you wish not to. -- penubag  (talk) 02:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, javascripts don't go onto your userpage, they affect your account settings. Nevertheless, you'll like them. But because you have IE, which is really behind scripting and formatting standards, you should really download firefox for free. If you prefer not to, you will have to enable an emulator, which only remedies the problem a little. To do this, go to your preferences (link), click the Gadget tab and check the Javascript Standard Library to semi update your browser when viewing Wikipedia. I'll take care of the rest (I'm bored). message me when you're done. - penubag  (talk) 03:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

scripts

Agh, I forgot. I'm not authorized you alter your monobook. I'm not an administrator, so if you want them you'll have to do it yourself by using the import command. Go to your monobook (link), create the page and add the following (I suggest you add all of the scripts):

• For the clock, instert: importScript('Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Time');
  
• The best quick preview (only firefox): importScript('Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Watchlist since');
• This one's helpful, lightly highlites the names of admins: importScript('User:Ais523 non-admin/adminrights.js');

and insert this into your css page (link): .ais523_adminrights_admin {background-color: #E0FFFF !important};

• When you click on the User Contributions link from anyone's user page, there will be extra navigational tabs on the top of the page: importScript('User:Ais523/editcount.js');

Here's some optional ones:

• User:Where/commentLocalize.js -this code changes the timestamp on all signatures to your computer's local time (I've never tried this one)
• Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups - popups when you hover your mouse over links, it can be annoying so you can change preferences here

Sorry it took me so long to reply, I was testing to make sure the import command worked for all of the scripts. Have fun! --penubag (sock account) 05:37, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Late reply: I thought you'd like the clock since you told me you were looking at my page for a better one and since you kept on fixing the one on your page. I just threw in the other scripts for you while I was at it. -- penubag  (talk) 02:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

no prob. - penubag  (talk) 03:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Advance Wars: Days of Ruin COs

I have nominated List of Advance Wars: Days of Ruin COs, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Advance Wars: Days of Ruin COs. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. jonny-mt 08:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that--I was looking through some old AfD contributions and noticed that this very article had been brought up during the previous deletion discussion. When I realized the merge tag was over a year old, I decided to go ahead and nominate it. I look forward to hearing your opinion! --jonny-mt 08:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Monobook.css

I could note help but to notice that your page has ".ais523_adminrights_admin {background-color: #E0FFFF !important};".
I am a curious person, and I am wondering what does it do?? :) Λua∫Wise ^{(Operibus anteire)} 18:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Thanks!

I know some JS basics, but when I read that I thought someone simply forced their selves into the group admins, thus gaining access to their tools (although the background thing did not fit into this hypothesis)_{-Disclaimer: I am not interested in hacking WP, and do not intend to illegally find my way to sysop tools :)-}

Thanks again for the response, really appreciate it. :D

Λua∫Wise ^{(Operibus anteire)} 18:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Reception of Turning Point: Fall of Liberty

Firstly, I provided the wrong link in my recent edit description; the correct one is here: Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Secondly, it should be noted that how fans recieve a game is not relevant to the Reception section of an article. Fan reactions are either biased for or against a game, and thus do not provide a neutral point of view in this context, which is why only reliable reviews from significant gaming sites and publications are added. This way, the inherent positive or negative features of a game are not obscured by sheer hype. So far, this game has only been given a few reviews, and if more reviews from reputable sources are released, they will be added into the article.  Comandante Talk 07:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Now let's try and work this out. If you want to find a solution as to whether or not fan reception should be included in the article, then please comment here. I am not trying to disparage the game when I remove the fan recption statement, but rather only trying to follow WP policies and guidelines, which discourage the inclusion of fan opinions. I personally like this game, and even own the collectors' edition of it, which is the reason I became involved with this article in the first place. I just want the article to adhere to standards and have a semblance of quality.  Comandante Talk 01:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I totally agree that the gamefaqs review should not be included. Anyone can write those and as such, aren't credible reviews. I do believe that including the Metacritic user score is acceptable under Wikipedia guidelines. I have other Wiki pages in the past that have mentioned that despite negative critical response, that general public reception was better.

If this doesn't belong in the reception part, I apologize. You do appear to know what you are doing, so maybe you can assist on this and figure if there is anywhere where the fan reception could be added, as I have noticed that the fan reception for this game is much better than the critic response.

I'm not trying to be difficult or ruin the page. I read the Wiki pages about what's acceptable and I didn't think that my last addition was against the rules. If I am wrong, I do sincerely apologize as the page is very well written.Demonsmoke (talk) 08:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you came to the table, you don't know how many people come to Wikipedia just to turn small issues like this into utter disasters before they leave. Now, as for this, from my experience, any fan-related material (fansite links, quotes from fansites, fan-written reviews) has usually been kept out of VG articles, which is why I kept taking it out here. However, I've begun looking into the policies and guidelines and will consult other editors to see if there can be a compromise, but unfortunately I'll only be on WP sporadically for the next day or so. I will try to comment here with what action we can take as soon as possible, but keep in mind that it may be Wednesday at the latest. Thanks for cooperating.  Comandante Talk 17:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem. thanks for being cool about this. As I said earlier, I'm not hear to be difficult or hijack a site. If that addition can't stay on here, then you will have my fullest support and cooperation. Demonsmoke (talk) 20:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Finally got a chance to respond here, sorry about the wait. After further looking into the issue, I found out that I was right about the fan info, but for the wrong reasons. The proper policies that this goes aganist are parts of WP:VERI,WP:RELY, and WP:NPOV together; in summary, the fan info will have to be removed as it cannot be considered up to the WP reliability standard and is likely not a wholly accurate representation of fan reception of the game. Some fans will give this game a glowing report, while others will lean lukewarm in how they like the game, and still others will say the game is worth playing only once and yet claim to be fans. If we included the views of one group of fans, we would have to include the views of everyone else to be fair. I won't remove the info, though, until you respond here and can confirm you have no other problem with its removal; if you are fine with it, then this issue will be resolved. Again, thanks for cooperating in all of this.  Comandante Talk 22:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I really respect the effort you have shown. AS such, I will remove the info I added on my own accord. I would like you to consider this a good will gesture and a gesture of respect on my part for you Commandante, Thank you. Demonsmoke (talk) 04:50, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, and I appreciate your willingness to bring this to a swift and amiable resolution.  Comandante Talk 19:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

According to GameSpot, fan reception wasn't even that good unlike what was previously implied. Regardless I must say that out of all the issues in reception sections (and I've editted ALOT of those), this has got to be the most politely put and ressolved, good for you. Stabby Joe (talk) 21:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Looking for help to improve Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare

Hi, I noticed that you edited the article Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare recently and I am just letting you know that I plan on working on the article over the next few weeks in order to bring it up to Featured Article status. If you have time, please consider helping out with the article by improving the referencing, content, and other miscellaneous activities in order for the article to meet the standards set out at WP:WIAFA. Thanks for your time! Gary King (talk) 05:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Plot is still being worked on. Feel free to condense it even further - it is far too long at it is. Regarding the characters section, feel free to start a discussion about that and I will pitch in. I don't have an opinion on that right now. Gary King (talk) 19:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

How does the Rainbow Six: Vegas 2 article require "cleanup"?

On the contrary, I think the article requires ADDITIONS, not clean-up. The plot is unfinished, and the character list is quite slim. Otherwise, the article seems decent. Neil the Cellist (talk) 23:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I see what you mean. Thanks for the quick reply. Neil the Cellist (talk) 01:08, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

GA review

Good thing you nominated it for GA because I was thinking about doing the same. However, I did not do so because I thought that it wouldn't pass. I've worked a little bit with GA articles mainly in the science field (ie. Force still not a GA), and could tell you that obtaining GA status is actually pretty hard. You may still need to put the History of development, and cultural significance into the article for a strong GA pass. I haven't worked much with GA in video games so I may be all wrong, it's to my understanding that those require less than a science article. Well, best of luck! -- penubag  (talk) 19:38, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! AW:DoR made it to GA status! =-D -- penubag  (talk) 01:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

re

I know that feeling, where you saw something and wish to comeback to it but forgotten where it was. This might help next time: [1]. Wikipedia's search engine sucks pretty bad, it runs off Lucene. The only reason why we use this is because it's licensed under a GPL like license (free of cost). Jimbo Wales, Wikipedia creator, said something like he hopes to run ads on Wikipedia to fund for various features (like a better search, typo correction, and flash integration), although I'm really against ads on Wikipedia. You can read more on this here: [2] [3] [4]. Also, if you need help next time, don't hesitate to ask, if I'm online. I'm not the best, but I generally know my way around here. -- penubag  (talk) 03:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Another link shows how wikipedia will looks with ads -- penubag  (talk) 03:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

StrategyWiki link

I looked at that discussion, however the discussion seems to say that each is decided on a case by case basis. StrategyWiki is not SmashWiki, and according to this, it seems there were no complaints. Do feel free to bring it up again, as StrategyWiki covers a different aspect of the game and tries to avoid any speculation. -- Prod (Talk) 17:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem, glad we could easily solve it :). -- Prod (Talk) 18:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Synopsis vs. Plot

I was taking the word 'synopsis' to mean synopsis of the story as a whole, subsections of which being plot and characters. To me it just seems strange to have Synopsis, below plot. We could probably find other vocabulary altogether, such as "Plot summary" followed by "Story" and "Characters" as in BioShock Hows that? xenocidic (talk) 17:09, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Fire at will, my friend. xenocidic (talk) 17:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

congrats

On helping get COD 4 to good article status. Next stop, featured article. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 19:40, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

How to

you withdraw an afd by simply adding a comment to that effect, with "nomination withdrawn" in bold. If there was also not body saying delete, you can simply close it after that as a non-admin closing, using the directions at afd. In this case, since there were two brief comments for delete in addition to your nom, it's wise to be cautious and let an admin will come by and close it using their judgment. DGG (talk) 19:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Power/Speed/Technique on Days of Ruin

Why is it we can't have at least a rough a description of what Power/Speed/Technique do in the article? There are so many bogus descriptions online that it would be nice to have a correct one somewhere (which I thought I was helpfully providing after not finding it here and having to work for a while to find). If this goes in another article please redirect me, I don't see it out there. Or if there is some general policy on why we don't put information useful for playing the game into these. I can provide online references if that was the problem, it isn't from the official game guide.69.250.215.53 (talk) 02:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

There was a debate earlier on concerning whether or not to keep it, since every time it was added in, the descriptions for Power/Speed/Technique were changed. As there is no reliable source for the info, it was decided to just keep it out.

However, it should be noted that there is a policy against including info that can help someone play the game, WP:GAMEGUIDE. Basically, as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is not a place for gamers to share tips on gameplay; in other words, if the info in question is only useful to someone playing the game, it cannot be added. It is assumed that if someone really wants to know specific gameplay details, they would go to a more appropriate site than WP. Hopefully this will answer your question. -- Comandante {Talk} 19:21, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Marcus Fenix

An article that you have been involved in editing, Marcus Fenix, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcus Fenix. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? ZeroGiga (talk) 09:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Alt history

Hi Commandante, I know you read a lot of Alt history and was wondering which scenario was your favorite. The reason I ask is because my professor is assigning me to write a short alt history story of my own (and luckily I remembered you!) You wouldn't mind if you referred me to your favorite titles so I can borrow their ideas. Thank you so much, it would greatly help me! -- penubag  (talk) 06:02, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the reply, I'll look into those books. -- penubag  (talk) 02:24, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion ABOMB glitch

While I understand and respect the need to not let anyone just post their mind about subjects in order to keep wikipedia as factual as possible, this is a unique situation. Part of what has been so disconcerting about the circumstances surrounding the ABOMB glitch is the fact that professional sources have turned a blind eye towards it, despite the fact that its existance has been reported to them by numerous individuals, including myself. Instead, all that has been printed about Oblivion has been praises and sales pitches. Review sites and magazines often have a vested interest in some of the products they review, we saw as much with the repercussions of Gerstmann's review of 'Kane and Lynch'. If one cannot trust published media to tell the whole truth, should we then just stick our heads in the sand and pretend the rest does not exist? I actually believe the game is worthy of high praises, but if the good is going to be listed, the sortcomings should be as well. After all, this is something that people are going to be spending their money on, and as many facts should be in the public domain as possible. And the existance of this glitch is indeed fact.

Here is a program glitch that through user testing appears to occur in 100% of games. The only way to avoid it is to not play the game long enough for the counter to increment high enough to cause a problem - which is dependant on the frame rate utilized. The glitch has even been admitted by Bethesda, and they have a standardized response which I provided (and have also received personally) in which they announce that they have no plans to fix the problem and even point people to the 3rd party solutions. PC users have been using the programs provided for over a year to lower the counter in question without any reported effects other than to have the glitch removed (at least until the counter once again reaches the same problematic value and they have to lower it again). Of course, anyone who bought the game for the xbox360 or PS3 cannot use these solutions, so that is really where the problem lies. Maybe this doesn't seem like such a big deal - one could simply restart the game, but given the grand scope of Oblivion and that one of its core elements is spending considerable time developing a character things are no longer so simple.

It is no less important to note that Fallout uses the same engine; that is fact, not opinion - wikipedia itself grants it. If Bethesda has been unwilling or unable to fix the problem for one game, it is no small chance that the same issue will occur with the next. Once again, this involves people's money and time, so as much information should be provided as possible, both good and bad. In fact, if the same glitch does recur in Fallout 3, and it becomes known that wikipedia refused to list known facts about it (despite the sheer number of occurances, testing, and universal solution not only making it fact, but also provable - I'll take hundreds of consumers over one game magazine reporter any day) because no one getting paid by the industry was interested in writing something up, how do you think the site's credibility in this category will be viewed? Factual resource, or pawn of developers, it's wikipedia's choice.

As I said, I understand your point about keeping things reliable. I just don't think you get much more reliable than what we have. Once again, not only has the source of the problem been located, it has been resolved (at least temporarily). Using dirty code, yes, but resolved nonetheless. The problem is, users on 2 of the 3 platforms which the game runs on can't use the solutions, and people on those platforms should know about this. Have a good day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KhalienBB (talk • contribs) 23:14, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

KhalienBB

I'll grant you your points on the Fallout article. I was skeptical of that when I wrote it, as it is indeed speculation. Speculation with foundation, but speculation all the same, which is why I didn't put it back up until the additions to the Oblivion page went down as well. Then it was more of, if both are going down, then why not?

As for the admin's statement about the article stating itself that the oblivion section isn't worthy of inclusion, I have to admit that I'm more than a little disappointed in their limited thinking. I would have to not only wholly disagree with them, but be inclined to believe that the admin either didn't understand the point of, or didn't read all of the paragraph. The fact that no one in the professional media has written anything about this, despite multiple mods created to fix it for the PC - which have been successfully used by hundreds if not thousands (once again not available to console gamers), countless forum postings, and a petition created and sent to the company says more about the sorry state of the industry than anything else. Bethesda is a heavy hitter, and no one wants to step on their toes. Compared to that consumers are nothing. We've already spent our money after all.

You say that it's not up to WP standards. Well, maybe it's time to evolve those standards. I understand and agree that you can't rely merely on speculation and rumor. If you did WP would lose all credibility very quickly. However, if there is enough of a support structure, maybe a little more effort should be given before dropping things into the trash. You don't trust what I or those in the forums have to say automatically. Good for you. Here's a radical idea: have someone from WP test it. In this case it would be rediculously easy. For starters, write an email to Bethesda Support as a user describing the glitch as it has been in the forums. It's free, so where's the harm? When a response is sent, compare it to what was listed. You be the judge if I'm lying or mistaken.

At the same time, test the glitch. Pick one of the three systems (a high-end PC would be preferable as the higher the frame rate the quicker the counter increments to problematic levels), and just let it go. Play it if you want, and when you're not, let it keep running. Just remember to save periodically. This way it shouldn't be long before the glitch occurs and the game becomes unplayable. It won't be too hard to spot; spells hang in the air, and working inner doors, leaving oblivion realms (one of the main points of the game), and basically any secondary animaion will crawl. Then try out one of the fixes. Three are listed on the official forum page provided, and once again they're all free. I'm sure you could even get help with this, as most would just be happy that someone was actually listening. Running one of the fixes takes about ten seconds. They alter one byte only in the save file, resetting a hex value from 49 to 40. Check for yourself if the problem persists.

I'm not asking WP to trust me, or anyone in the forum. All I'm asking is for WP to take a second to look, and then trust itself. What I trust in is that if anyone actually does it will become apparent very quickly that we're not the ones being less than honest here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KhalienBB (talk • contribs) 07:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

KhalienBB

Thanks for the point in the right direction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KhalienBB (talk • contribs) 22:43, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Tcrbsv2-360-cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Tcrbsv2-360-cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Xenocidic comments

No problem at all. I just wish I hadn't blundered the edit summary so many times! ;> xenocidic (talk) 21:02, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Fallout 3

Nope, that wouldn't be considered a reliable source as it is self published and doesn't qualify for exception based on this (as the COD4 one did). Fire at will. Oh, and thanks =) xenocidic (talk) 21:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Catch 22

Ping!. xenocidic (talk) 13:33, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Glitches

I'd probably tend to say "no, don't include" but is there a specific example? I'm off for the night, will consider it further in the morning. –xenocidic (talk) 03:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

smacks of improperly cited original research. by its own admission, not worth of inclusion: "To date there is not known to be a single mention of the glitch in any mainstream professional publication, on any media." If you have resistance in removing it, take it to WT:WPVG for further input. –xenocidic (talk) 12:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Semi-PP

Ping! –xenocidic (talk) 21:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

 Done! –xenocidic (talk) 23:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Barnstar

Thank you so much for the barnstar! It is very much appreciated :). I'd give you a barnstar too...but I don't really know what you did :P. Anyway, good luck on whatever you're trying to do, and feel proud of your own achievements! --haha169 (talk) 03:31, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! That comment really means a lot to me. :) As you can imagine, you don't receive much positive comments at the FAC; they're too busy reviewing the article. I'll give you half a barnstar for being so nice to me - I'm not sure what your conduct is with others, though I'm sure its very kind as well.--haha169 (talk) 03:48, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

No problem. That last comment you left reminded me of User: Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles, for some reason.--haha169 (talk) 04:12, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Wait...I just noticed something. "Doubleplusthanks". Are you quoting 1984? Newspeak? Nice...:P --haha169 (talk) 22:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! It's actually at WP:FTC right now. Lots of Featured Candidacy going on with this article, lolz... --haha169 (talk) 22:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Alternate history WikiProject

Hey if you are interested I have created an Alternate History WikiProject. I hope to see you there. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 19:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Zpops edits

Are you kidding me? That was not vandalism at all. Fallout 3 features action combat with no statistical influence on outcomes, and as such it does not meet the classic definition of an RPG as widely accepted. Bethesda's fallout is more properly classified as a spin off like BOS or FO:T because like those, it departs from the gameplay of the core FO games. Finally, anyone with eyes can see that VATS has nothing to do with turn based combat, and is instead real time with pause. Real time with pause is a type of combat (like in BG or KOTOR) where action plays out in real time and can be paused to queue up commands. This describes VATS 100%. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zpops (talk • contribs) 20:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Keep in mind that I used a premade warning template for the above message, and assumed you were vandalizing because you were not the first to put forth the opinion that Fallout 3 is a spinoff. Yes, that is an opinion, because several reliable sources, including Bethesda, have stated that the game is officially a part of the main series; just because it has differences in gameplay does not make it a spinoff. Secondly, the game has also been conclusively described as an action rpg, perhaps not in those exact words, but it's the genre that best fits. The game has several elements fitting of an rpg, such as the SPECIAL system, leveling up, stats, etc. I apologize if the template I used was overly blunt, but even though your edits may not have been vandalism, that does not make them justified/correct. -- Comandante {Talk} 20:49, 27 July 2008 (UTC)