User talk:Craw-daddy/Archive 2

Thanks

Thanks, you are right (re my latest intervention in Gavin Collins RfC). The situation is tense enough as it is. Probably diplomacy is not my most developed quality... I looked for a graphic way to show that asking if a person has ever done something is a (not too) implicit way of accusing that person. I hope somebody else will find a more elegant way to put it. Thanks again, and happy editing, Goochelaar 22:19, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I don't know if much can be done at this point. --Craw-daddy | T | 22:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it seems so. It is the first time I find someone in WP so impermeable to criticism as G.C. seems to be... Goochelaar 22:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Redirecting articles

I've undone some of your redirects. Two hours after a prod really isn't enough time to build concensus on whether merge, redirect, or deletion is the right course.--Robbstrd 13:54, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

There has been talk about redirecting these articles already. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Role-playing games#Greyhawk locations (redirects) and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Greyhawk#Greyhawk (general cleanup). --Craw-daddy | T | 15:10, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Emmantiensien

An article that you have been involved in editing, Emmantiensien, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emmantiensien. Thank you.

Award

		The Original Barnstar
		For recognition of all your recent work on behalf of WikiProject RPG and sourcing, editing and otherwise cleaning up various RPG articles and saving them from deletion. Web Warlock 15:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Game manufacturers listed in Years In Games Articles?

The articles 2007 in games, etc., are very interesting to me for their attempt to describe the game market at a particular time. An important part of this, I feel, is what each company was doing at the time: it's quite different if WoTC markets a game than if Steve Jackson Games markets the same game. You undid my changes to the games list, that indicated what company had made each game, and I want to talk to you about that since I feel it is a useful addition to the page. Downtown_dan_seattle 08:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I thought that the information in already included in the individual articles for the games (as almost every game on this list has a corresponding Wiki article). Hence it was an unnecessary duplication, as well as cluttering up the list and (in my opinion) making it less readable than it otherwise would be. I won't dispute you if you add the manufacturers back (after all I'm only one editor), but I don't think that information belongs in this list. If you do insert it back, I also think that you shouldn't have redlinks in it either, so, for example, don't use wikilinks to companies that don't have corresponding article (just list the company name like Warfrog and not Warfrog). And I moved your comment to the end of my talk page as I like them to be in that order. --Craw-daddy | T | 18:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

PostBooks Deletion on December 2, 2007

I am trying to understand the reason the page I created "PostBooks" was deleted on December 2, 2007. In reviewing all I could find out around it, I am still at a loss. I am no Wikipedia expert, and it has obviously been a couple of weeks since I visited the page. But I cannot understand the reason for deletion. Any insight would be greatly appreciate, as would advice on re-instating that page or creating another. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wallyton (talk • contribs) 14:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your note

I agree that there's no need to reply to the accusation of sock-puppetry there. It's just another bullying tactic, IMO. I am glad to see that Gavin.collins said that he didn't think I'm a sock puppet though. I'm taking a break from the RPG articles for a while anyway, so you might not see me around as much. But if you need help with something specific, obviously I'm sympathetic to the project, so feel free to give me a shout on my talk page. Rray (talk) 13:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

start the Richard Borg article?

I noticed you created Category:Richard Borg games. I think Richard deserves an article, but since he's a friend of mine, I can't write it. Can I suggest you do so?--Mike Selinker (talk) 15:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I fully intend to create such an article, and I certainly think that he deserves one too. (I noted this on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Board and table games, hoping that someone else was also interested in creating such an article, but there hasn't been any takers in the meantime.) Even though you can't write the article, I'm more than happy to receive suggestions for sources that talk about Richard and/or his games, even as sources for the articles on his games. The only one I know of for sure is in the most recent issue of Knucklebones magazine, but I would think that there should be more of them. So any pointers to references are more than welcome, and wouldn't be any sort of conflict of interest (as they're verifiable, after all). Further, there shouldn't be any conflict of interest if you have some suitable (i.e. free) image of Richard that could be added to the article. Thanks in advance! --Craw-daddy | T | 17:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Grawp and your redirects

FYI, banned vandal Grawp undid a bunch of your redirects as an anon; I've restored them and the IP is blocked. Now I have another hundred or so things on my watchlist; great. --Jack Merridew 08:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Lathander

An editor has asked if your redirect of the article Lathander was appropriate without prior consensus or consultation with the authors of the articles. Could you give make your opinion known at Talk:Lathander? --Gavin Collins (talk) 20:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Coverpic.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Coverpic.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Different Worlds

I have ordered 31 back issues of Different Worlds magazines. (It was a general RPG magazine in the 1980's that covered the whole industry.) If you're having trouble finding sources for something, please drop me a note on my talk page, and I'll see what comes up in my back issues of Different Worlds. Rray (talk) 03:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Rray! I will likely contact you at some point.  :) --Craw-daddy | T | 19:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

The Fantasy Trip

I saw your suggestions--It sounds like a good idea--I just started the melee page when I noticed that the melee link on the steve jackson page went nowhere--I may not have to much time to move those pages over to the Fantasy Trip in the near future, but go for it if you're so inclined.Gilbertine goldmark (talk) 20:40, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I replied to your message on my talk page, sir. Also, The Fantasy Trip received coverage in Different Worlds back in the day, so I'll try to hit that article too. Rray (talk) 23:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Discouraged?

"They" want you to get discouraged and leave - that's one less opponent on Wikipedia to stand in their way. But yeah, that said, I totally understand the feeling. Editing Wikipedia used to be a lot more fun before all the Wiki-lawyers stepped in to try to regulate it according to their interpretation of how it should be. BOZ (talk) 13:24, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I know what you mean, but it is getting rather annoying having to repeat myself at every step that I take. If I remove a notability tag, then I have to "defend myself" later on the talk page, etc, etc ad nauseum. If you'll pardon the rude language, I once described Wikipedia as a clusterfuck to a friend of mine, and start to have that feeling more and more each passing day (although I wouldn't necessarily characterize it as having the "potential to cause serious damage" but more so in the second sense of the definition there). --Craw-daddy | T | 13:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree that their goal is to get you to quit. The whole "conflict" thing is ridiculous. Don't let it bother you, please. Rray (talk) 14:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Well I hope this helps. THANK YOU for all your work today on the Car Wars article! I find taking a break every couple of days is good for me. Helps me keep in it for the long run. Web Warlock (talk) 15:24, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

My thanks in return to you and Bilby. The two of you added most of the references today. I just added one myself. I did try to clean up the article a couple of weeks ago by removing some of the "in universe" material. I just thought that I'd "bother" those whom I knew had access to references that I don't (like you and your big stack of back issues). Hope it wasn't too much of a bother.  :) --Craw-daddy | T | 15:29, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Every litle bit helps, whether it is one source or a dozen. An you can thank my wife for letting me keep these all in our basement spread out so I can get to them anytime I want! Web Warlock (talk) 15:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I hope you thanked your wife properly yesterday.  :) --Craw-daddy | T | 15:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Yesterday and everyday! ;) Keep up the great work. Web Warlock (talk) 15:42, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Nicotine Girls

You might also enjoy an RPG called Nicotine Girls. Good funny stuff, this. Rray (talk) 20:54, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that Rray!  :) --Craw-daddy | T | 22:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

List of D&D monsters

Hello, we've been busily working on how to make tables for a D&D monster list page, and could use your input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons#Negotiable concepts. BOZ (talk) 17:54, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Ogre (game)

It's GA is on hold.--TrUCo-X 20:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for replying to the queries rapidly. It has passed its GAN, congratulations to your hardwork and to the project. Keep up the good work. You deserve to present this code:{{User Good Article|Ogre (game)}}

--TrUCo-X 21:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC) Many thanks! --Craw-daddy | T | 21:39, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Tag

Thanks, I stole it from someone else (which I could remember who). I liked it a lot :-) Hobit (talk) 23:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Template:RPGproject‎

as i noted on the talk page something recently made it display funny when i viewed thetalk page for Gary Gygax. i think i fixed it, but know little to nothing about these templates so you amy want to check my most recent edit to the template and make sure i didn't break something in the process. shadzar-talk 12:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I don't know much about templates myself.  :) I sort of copied the format from another one, and looked at the {{WPBannerMeta}} template to try and do things correctly. Basically I was trying to set it up so that the quality/importance ratings could be added to the talk page templates. Seems like you fixed it. Thanks! --Craw-daddy | T | 12:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

i just checked the same bannermeta page and tried adding what seemed missing from the 'board and table games' template. it seems the missing thing was the NAME section that caused it. not having a name made it display the link instead maybe? anywho hopefully we won't have to mcuk around with it too much more. but if any notes are needed, it may need to be changed where i placed no with a yes when the note is added to get it to display correctly. thanks for looking at my edit and upgrading the template to begin with. at least it let me learn something new about WP. shadzar-talk 12:52, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Tafl games (feedback?)

Hey, congrats on your barn star! I was just wondering if you have any feedback on the Tafl games article. I'd like to try to get it ready for Good Article nomination. What do you think, are we getting close? How can we make it better? Wilhelm meis (talk) 22:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll have a closer look at that article tomorrow. Am tired now, so that's why I'm only doing some "grunt" work of updating templates and such. My initial comment is that a few more citations might be appropriate, if possible in various places. Generally, having more is better.  :) Especially for statements like "There is also some controversy over whether some tafl games (i.e. hnefatafl) employed dice." The natural thing that here is that if there's a controversy, then there should be references to support such a thing (i.e. quote some well-known historian, or whatever, that says "yes, dice were used" and another who says "no, I don't think so"). Similarly, the statement "This etymology is doubted,..." All of these kinds of statements are crying out for references, and whomever does a GA review will say exactly the same thing. (So that's why I'm saying it now.) Anyhow, I'll likely have some more comments in a day or two. Hope this helps. (And I don't mean to sound negative.) Keep up the good work!  :) --Craw-daddy | T | 22:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Vampire-hunting?

What's with your campaign to delete so many article tied to World of Darkness's Vampire series? --Loremaster (talk) 00:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It just that there's a bunch of articles that are dealing with non-notable aspects of the game. All of the articles I've prodded also badly fail WP:WAF and/or WP:PLOT. You'll note that I haven't prodded any of the articles about the games themselves as those are quite notable (if in need of references themselves). I'm not averse to a merger of some and/or most of these articles, but as is there's loads of in-universe material that makes no claim to, or demonstration of notability. --Craw-daddy | T | 06:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Is there a specific reason why you have added the prod-warning only on some of the pages within a certain category inside WoD, instead of all of the similar level pages? E.g. you added the prod-template to articles Caitiff (World of Darkness) (changed to notability) and Followers of Set articles, but not to other similar entities such as Assamite, Brujah and Giovanni. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 08:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I did prod Caitiff, and it was removed, so that's why I added the notability template. As to why I didn't prod them all, well, I started to see that there was some objection, and I figured that I would see how the two AfDs I raised would proceed (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inconnu (World of Darkness)‎ and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sabbat (World of Darkness)). --Craw-daddy | T | 09:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

When I read the WP:FICTION I think that before tagging all those articles with prod-tags you should've considered proposing a merger of those articles. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 09:26, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I did start some discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Role-playing games#Category:Vampire: The Masquerade. If you wish to do so, it is your perogative to remove my prod tags. However, simply doing that doesn't deal with the notability problems of those particular articles. While Vampire: The Masquerade is notable, could you demonstrate nobility for each of the vampiric sects? I would think that a much better article could be written that combines information on all of them (and might actually have a real source or two). Given time this week, I'll see what can be done with Book of Nod, for example, for which I did find some sources that are more than just rehashing of the game material. --Craw-daddy | T | 09:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration?

I am alerting you that we are now considering a Request for Arbitration regarding him as an alternative to mediation, and would like your opinion on the matter. BOZ (talk) 13:56, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

The Miniatures Page

Well, that's clearly inappropriate content for the article and I've removed it, as well. I think that a good argument could be made that it is a BLP violation. After all, it is clearly contentious, uncited and about the actions of real people. -Chunky Rice (talk) 14:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Removing BLP violations is specifically exempt from 3RR, but it's best if you never have to use that defense. I'll be keeping my eye on the article as well. -Chunky Rice (talk) 16:54, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

The "Sport" strangeness

Looks like several weird changes. I fixed a couple, but I'm not very familiar with this redirect stuff, so I hope you'll look at the edit history and fix the various changes. Thanks. 2005 (talk) 09:52, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll try to have a look. I think this editor could be User:Dakota Blue Richards back under a different name, and starting up with the "card game/sport" changes again.  :( --Craw-daddy | T | 09:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

It has to be the same person. Hopefully this won't be a new identity every day kind of thing. 2005 (talk) 09:59, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

If you check the old identity, it was blocked as it's the name of an actress. So I don't think that we'll see lots of new accounts, but for some reason I expect that much time will be spent chasing this around. Chess and draughts, for example, were added to the "Sports" category. I'm adding something to the talk page of these articles, so at least some discussion will have started about it and/or others might be alerted to this. I sincerely doubt there's consensus to include Chess, Draughts, or Card Games in the "Sports" category. --Craw-daddy | T | 10:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

But olnly card games ! Not daughts , chess , go and backgammon ! But let me a message ! Ciao ! Nastasija Marachkovskaja ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nastasija Marachkovskaja (talk • contribs) 10:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Here we go again

Special:Contributions/Eremia. More of the sports junk. 2005 (talk) 23:39, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Tribbles (game)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Tribbles (game), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tribbles (game). Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 14:15, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Craw-daddy. You have new messages at Barneca's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A card game is a sport ! Card games are sports ! I'd to put article and category with title " card games " in category " sports " ! And I'd like to create a new category titled " Psychical sports " !

I'd like to include card games in the sports , and put the articles " card games " , and category " card garmes " in the category " sports " ! Because , they necessite training , concentration , qualities , and there is rules and reglement ! A gard game is a sport ! Card games are sports ! They need memories , and calm ! They are not physical sports , but psychical sports ! A sport is not specially physical ! Sports necssite training , qualities , concentration , calm , and includes tules , and a reglement ! And not onyly physically ! They can be psychical , por physical ! And I want to create a category " Psychical sports " ! Please , let me a message ! A sport is not only physical , but can be psychical to !

Monica Rosu

like —Preceding unsigned comment added by Monica Rosu (talk • contribs) 10:08, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Monica/Eremia/etc. is now blocked indef. Sorry my attempt at reforming them prolonged the agony. Report any more of these obvious vandals to AIV, and in your report, link to: User:Barneca/watch/bvr, and hopefully whoever is dealing with AIV will deal with them quickly. --barneca (talk) 13:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Microgames References

General comments - Hey! My pleasure! Just let me know if you need/want more detail. I am picking up again on Monday with WD#55 and will be working my way up to #100 (or so). After that I think I might do the Dragon mags. Mostly cause I am having a fun time going through all these old mags! Web Warlock (talk) 17:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Undead (Steve Jackson)

Here is a suprised one I found last night. < ref>Melton, Gordon (1994). The Vampire Book: The Encyclopedia of the Undead (1st ed.). Detroit, MI: Visible Ink Press. p. 852. ISBN 0-8103-2295-1.</ ref> He mentioned Steve Jackson's "The Undead" as one of the very first Vampire-related games on the market. The author also mentions it is unique in the respect that it could be played as a board game or as an RPG. Still looking for more. Web Warlock (talk) 15:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Another review in White Dwarf #28, Open Box. Rob Hugget gives it a 8/10. He particular liked the map of 1890's London. Web Warlock (talk) 19:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Good stuff here! --Craw-daddy | T | 11:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Illuminati

Illuminati from Steven Jackson Games review in White Dwarf #40. < ref>Masters, Phil (1983). "Open Box - Illuminati Review". White Dwarf. 40. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)</ ref> Phil called it a "very playable game with a good element of skill" and gave it an overall grade of 7/10. Came in a plastic box, but did not have dice. Let me know if you need more. Web Warlock (talk) 18:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Illuminati Expansion Sets I and II are featured in White Dwarf #44, pages 12-13. Phil reviews again giving them 6/10 each overall. Web Warlock (talk) 19:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Illuminati is probably one of the easier ones to find references for, but I won't complain about (or turn down) the ones you provide here! --Craw-daddy | T | 11:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Barbarian Prince

Detailed in Open Box in White Dwarf #29, page 15. Bill Skirrow gives it 8/10. He says "Barbarian Prince is a colourful and absorbing game that, unlike many solitaire games, does not get bogged down in mechanics of play". Published by Dwarfstar Minigames. Web Warlock (talk) 19:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!  :) --Craw-daddy | T | 11:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Warlock of Firetop Mountain

Does this one count? It seems a bit "big" for a mini-game. Let me know. White Dwarf #36 reviews it and gives it 10/10. Web Warlock (talk) 19:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

One that I'm not familiar with. You're finding some good info here. After seeking some info about it online, I'd agree that it might not fit into what seems to be the conventional definition of a minigame, especially with the "fancy" molded plastic pieces that seem to have come with the game. --Craw-daddy | T | 11:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Lost Worlds

Do these count? If so then WD #52 is a good one. Web Warlock (talk) 20:33, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean the "booklet" games published by Flying Buffalo? Or the boardgames that were based on these games? They might count. I suppose the definition of what is a minigame could be one of those slightly nebulous things. --Craw-daddy | T | 11:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

OGRE

White Dwarf #2 (Aug/Sept 1977) Open Box feature talks about it and new "craze" of microgames. Martin Easterbrook gives it 8/10. Let me know if you want more. Web Warlock (talk) 02:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

If you could give me more info about this one please!  :) Maybe I'll have to see if the local university library can score me a copy of this article (I can see how good their "inter-library loan" service really is...) I think that Ogre is widely considered one of the first microgames (or certainly one of the very first successful ones). --Craw-daddy | T | 13:03, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For recognition of all your work on board and role-playing games. While the rest of us are bickering, you're out there actually improving the articles. Percy Snoodle (talk) 15:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Toys n games

Can you give an opinion on the third nutshell point at Wikipedia:Notability (toys and games) on its talk? (since you are the last contributor to the talk.) Ultra! 16:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Done! --Craw-daddy | T | 19:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge D&D assessment template with WikiProject Role-playing games

I think that you misunderstood my proposal, under the change the D&D WikiProject would still have its own assessment categories and tables. The only difference would be that anything tagged as part of the D&D project would automatically be also tagged as part of the RPG project, since everything relevant to D&D is also relevant to RPGs; one is a subset of the other. In the end in means that both projects have more tagged and assessed articles because people in both projects would be working together on the tagging and assessment. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 22:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Rollback granted

After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback can be used to revert vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback may be removed at any time.

If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! Greeves ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:59, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! --Craw-daddy | T | 15:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Warhammer 40,000 transwiki

Greetings Falcorian! I dropped by to ask you about Wikia and such. I can try to help out with transwiki-ing some of the WH40K stuff and other things (such as White Wolf-related material from Category:World of Darkness and related sub-categories which have similar notability difficulties). I *think* I have an idea of what I'm supposed to do to transfer the edit history and such, but am not an admin (or janitor, or helper, etc) at Wikia. You seem to suggest that you can turn me into such a person that would be able to import edit histories, correct? I have an account under the same user name at Wikia. Could you promote me there, please? You can contact me offline (via e-mail) if it will help with some sort of verification. Thanks. --Craw-daddy | T | 18:30, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

P.S. I would gladly use your Python script to help me out with the transwiki-ing.  :) --Craw-daddy | T | 18:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello! I'd love to have help, however I'm only a sysop on the 40k Wikia. Wikia is a Wiki hosting service, so each Wiki has it's own sysops. Basically, that means I can't give you a hand with WW stuff, since I have no connections on their Wikia (Assuming one exists, if it doesn't though you could make one!).

That being said, you can do this process (far less elegantly) without sysop on the target (you NEVER need sysop on Wikipedia). It's a little late for me tonight, if you're interested still, hit me up, I'll explain it tomorrow. --Falcorian ^(talk) 04:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

as for the parts in wiki, the preferred method for handling these is to either merge or redirect. Figure out a suitable page and do so. I'm removing the prods, but you're much more qualified on organizing it than I am. That way the names will at least go to something here when people enter them. It will be easier than taking every one of them to Afd, which will be the alternative, since they are always defended--and the afds generally end up in a merge anyway. DGG (talk) 03:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 19:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Owl and Weasel

(heh... good grief; /everyone/ has received that wikimania hook, it seems...)

Anyhow; Owl and Weasel = "start class"? Please let me know how that works, for reference. i.e. "start class" = "An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources." In what ways is the article "quite incomplete" and "requiring much more reliable sourcing"?

Even with an upgrade, that would only presumably take it to "C class"; described as "still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup", but from my p.o.v. the article is above/beyond that stage.

Help, please. ;) Thanks, David. Harami2000 (talk) 13:22, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to change them if you think I've misjudged things. I suppose one of the main reasons I put "start" was that most of the references seemed to be to primary sources, i.e. the magazine itself. While this isn't a bad thing, having a couple more references that point to the significance of the magazine, etc, would certainly give a a C- (or B-) class rating. --Craw-daddy | T | 17:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:GiveMeTheBrain-cover.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:GiveMeTheBrain-cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:15, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7

Hi there!  :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 05:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I can see that you have put some work into the Gary Gygax article, which I have nominated for a GA review. If there is anything you can do to help it get passed, please join in! Also, feel free to comment on the D&D WikiProject talk page regarding our efforts to get articles in the 0.7 release. BOZ (talk) 13:53, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Wizards of the Coast is now up for GA review. If you're interested in helping, come join me. :) BOZ (talk) 21:46, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/63.3.1.1 (2nd)

So you really think that the former <name deleted> is pulling the strings on this case? I seriously asking, because if so, I can close the current sock case and open another one. MuZemike (talk) 14:56, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

That's my suspicion. As I said in the sock case, I base this on the style of contributions, the particular wordings in the AfD discussions of at least some of these IPs (most crucially, the "unoriginal research" phrase), and the specific "calling out" of users such as TTN and Doctorfluffy in the response given on that sock case page. I'm not an expert in these kinds of matters, but it was this AfD response which made me somewhat suspicious, as I seemed to read those kinds of things many times before (arguing notability to "those who have edited the article"). I'm also no expert on the interpretation of WHOIS results, and how things can be changed using proxy addresses, etc. In any case, I'm not even sure if there's been any particular "violation" of WP rules in this case, other than the possible avoiding scrutiny issue. Yes, I think it's him, but it's based on the things I mentioned above. While all of these accounts have previous editing activity, they all seem to have become active again around 18-24 Sept, following the "vanishing". P.S. I removed the link to the user we're talking about per WP:RTV. --Craw-daddy | T | 15:18, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

In light of the comment placed on my talk page, I will gladly undo my close request. Do you think admin (via ANI) should keep tabs on this, as well? MuZemike (talk) 19:53, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

It probably wouldn't hurt in this case. --Craw-daddy | T | 19:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Update — just in case you are not aware, an admin has opened a request for checkuser into the matter. (I will not mention any more details to protect the rights of the vanished.) MuZemike (talk) 14:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Comptuer RPGs

Sorry about that - I'll try to avoid getting the CRPGs. 204.153.84.10 (talk) 20:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Here's an unusual one: On the Edge (game) has the talk page on a redirect... 204.153.84.10 (talk) 16:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, whew! I'm done. Hopefully I haven't troubled you too much or overburdened you. When I saw how many articles in the RPG categories were not in a Wikiproject, I figured I might as well be through and get them all... and "all" turned out to be in the hundreds! Have a good weekend, I'm out. And tired, so very tired. :) 204.153.84.10 (talk) 22:11, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello, Craw-daddy. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at WP:ANI regarding the recent sockpuppetry case at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/63.3.1.1 (2nd) and a user who has exercised the right to vanish. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#RTV revisited. Thank you. --MuZemike (talk) 00:51, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Barsaive

I think this subject is notable and should remain a separate article; I've reversed your redicterization. If you disagree, let's use talk of that article (or go straight to AfD).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:29, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

RPG Project and D&D Project

Hey there,

Sorry about that. I was trying to get some assessments on D&D books and related products and some of the more notable characters and such. You've been doing some really good assessments, and that seemed to be an easy way to catch your attention, and you didn't seem to mind, so I kept on going. I'll stop, but if you like, maybe I could post a list for you from time to time or something, if interested? 67.173.11.90 (talk) 12:38, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey it's alright, I think your assessments are as good as any, and probably better than mine since you are more impartial. And not all the D&D ones you've come across have been too bad in quality - take a look at how the C-Class D&D article category has grown in the last month or so! A steady growing C-Class indicates we have articles with growth potential. Now, if you didn't mind taking a look at a few more RPG designers who have D&D credits, without me adding an extra template this time, you could have a look at Mike Carr, Monte Cook, Rick Krebs, Robin Laws, Roger E. Moore, Sean K. Reynolds, and Dean Shomshak. I think that takes care of all the currently existing articles (that I know of). 67.173.11.90 (talk) 06:03, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey thanks, I think everything looks fine. :) There are a few D&D articles based on other media that don't really have anything to do with RPGs or in some cases even any games, if you want to have a look at these: Dragons of Autumn Twilight, Dragons of Flame (video game), List of Dragonlance novels, Neverwinter Nights, Neverwinter Nights (AOL game), Neverwinter Nights 2, Owl and Weasel, Planescape: Torment, Pool of Radiance, Pool of Radiance: Ruins of Myth Drannor, Scourge of Worlds: A Dungeons & Dragons Adventure, Strategic Simulations, Wanderlust (1991 novel). 67.173.11.90 (talk) 23:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey there, if those above aren't quite your style, you could always have a look at Metagaming (role-playing games), Metaplot, Non-player character, and Player character; all of those are rated for the RPG project in general, and to one degree or another all apply to D&D. I'm not sure whether they all apply strongly enough, but if you want to add an assessment (or remove the template from either or both of the first two) I'll leave that up to you. :) 67.173.11.90 (talk) 01:42, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Well then... happy editing. I do, greatly, appreciate any assessments you have done on D&D articles so far. And, I'm sorry if you felt that I was trying to take advantage of you. I did want to continue to request your help so long as you were offering it, and it seems I've overextended that generosity. If you like, I will remove the remaining templates myself. You have done a lot, and easily the vast majority of anything I was hoping for. I will not add the RPGproject template to any more articles that do not specifically deal with subjects that extend outside the reach of the D&D game. 67.173.11.90 (talk) 20:58, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

No worries. You should certainly feel free to assess these pages yourself. I'm not more qualified than any other editor.  :) I can likely have a look at the ones that you have listed up above at some point, but I will be away traveling in the next few days and have other work-related things to do that will take up my time, so can likely not get to them in the next week or so. Cheers. --Craw-daddy | T | 21:50, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I thought you'd be mad - glad you're not. :) I would probably have taken it upon myself to assess them sooner or later, but as long as you were obliging, I felt the need to continue to be lazy. ;) Regardless then, out of fairness, over the next week or so I will most definitely not add the template to anything (again, unless there is clear reason to do so), and being busy myself with other obligations, I will probably not get to assessing anything soon. There are a few hundred unassessed D&D articles - you probably got, maybe half of what there was, so when I say thanks, I really do mean it - and I will probably wind up doing most of them myself, or just leaving them for the next poor bastard who comes along to take care of them. Have a good time in your travels! 67.173.11.90 (talk) 22:00, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Ancients

Hey there, Ancients (board game) is up for deletion if you were interested. 204.153.84.10 (talk) 19:18, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Eremia, again

Our mutual friend is back as Special:Contributions/Colin_Farell. I reverted the obvious stuff, but alot of the game categorization is beyond my ken. I was about to just blanket revert, but some of it looks legit. Would you mind taking a look at her edits, at your convenience, and revert what needs reverting? If it all needs reverting, let me know and I'll do it; I'm not looking to make busy work for you.

FYI, I've filed a WP:RFCU to see if we can block her underlying IP. It won't work, but can't hurt to try. --barneca (talk) 19:07, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I think I pretty much agree with all of the reverts that you have done. I can't quite figure out what this editor's intentions are here, especially as he/she claims to be done vandalizing, and then immediately starts up again with the vandalism (as noted previously on your talk page). Oh well... --Craw-daddy | T | 20:11, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I chickened out and didn't do the reverts; when I saw you weren't around, I asked User:2005 to take a look. I don't know what their intentions are either, but at this point I don't care. From now on, I'm going to act as if they're banned, and revert every edit they make in future. I don't see the point of some silly discussion on ANI about whether they should be banned or not. --barneca (talk) 20:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Regarding this...

...No problem. Take care! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 02:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Centaurtopia (not yet deleted)

It was deleted, then restored again by another user. Cirt (talk) 13:17, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, just wasn't sure if it had been overlooked or not. (And it certainly deserved to be deleted for all the reasons given in that discussion.) Thanks! --Craw-daddy | T | 13:19, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Question

I think the D&D project is keeping track of redirects by having the talk page listed as one. 204.153.84.10 (talk) 23:25, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, I was trying to follow by example. 204.153.84.10 (talk) 23:30, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Craw-daddy, the D&D project is trying to tag all redirect pages, including those that never were articles, so that we can keep track of everything. The talk page tag doesn't hurt anything, so please don't remove them. Thanks! -Drilnoth (talk) 14:24, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, I just looked at your contribs and it looks like you are just updating, not deleting, them. I'd gotten a message from another user about it and hadn't looked before posting. Please do change {{D&D}} to {{D&D|class=Redirect|importance=NA}} whenever you see them. -Drilnoth (talk) 14:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, I just saw the deletion log. Had you tagged the articles for speedy deletion or was it just an administrator going through them on their own? -Drilnoth (talk) 15:14, 26 November 2008 (UTC)