Wikipedia

User talk:Seancdaug/archive1

< User talk:Seancdaug
Latest comment: 19 years ago by Seancdaug
The messages below were posted between 11 November 2004 and 4 October 2005. – Seancdaug 03:06, 4 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Welcome to the Wikipedia

edit

Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:


Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkTroll 05:50, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)


Image of Don Corneo and categorization

edit

Oh I see. I'm quite new to Wikipedia, as well as all the Wiki projects, so I'm unfamiliar with some of the functions. Guess I should've read the Help pages ^^". I'll do that from now on. Thanks.

As for the image of Don Corneo. I did a Google Image search of "Don Corneo" and found it. The good news is that there are multiple links to it, but the bad news it that they are all down. Judging by the style of artwork, I can safely assume that the Artwork of Don Corneo was illustrated by Testuya Nomura, the character designer of Final Fantasy VII. It's style resembles that of the other "rare illustrations" of Jessie, Biggs and Wedge.

Llywelyn ap Gruffydd

edit

Bore da a croeso i Wicipedia Saesneg. I've moved Llywelyn Ein Llyw Olaf ap Gruffydd back to the English title. Whilst I understand why you moved him, this is an English language Wikipedia, and page titles should reflect that. Take a look at Wikipedia:Naming conventions, notably:

Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature.

I'm about to do the same to Rhodri Mawr ap Merfyn and Owain Gwynedd ap Gruffydd. Sorry 'n' all… — OwenBlacker 11:40, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)

Clarifications in Final Fantasy...

edit

I saw the list of common elements needed a clean up, but was I'm a bit rusty on the earlier games. Thanks for clearing that up, I think that first section looks great now. -- Guybrush 01:15, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Castlevania series template

edit

Hello. I noticed you added a template to the Castlevania articles and it looks pretty good. However, Haunted Castle is usually considered to be a real Castlevania game, despite that name. Akumajō Dracula was the Japanese title of the games in the series until some time ago, and Hanted Castle also had that title, but for some reason, it was changed when it was released in the US.

That's why it's not just a "related" title. It's a legitimate Castlevania game (you can read about it here. You might have kept it down there in the template because it's not a console game, nor a handheld one, but in the case, the section should read something like "Miscelaneous", in my opinion. Not "Related titles". The "(arcade game)" part in the link can be also hidden, to improve looks.

I can change that myself, but first I'd like to hear your opinion. Thank you.--Kaonashi 02:32, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

FF Work

edit

I like the work you've done in FFIII, and also in the template i created. My only question is would those additional FF7 games be counted as primary titles and why? ZeWrestler 3:14 EST 11 Jan 2005

No, they probably shouldn't be. I see you've gone ahead and created a spinoff section on the template: that seems to make the most sense. Thanks, and sorry for the confusion. Seancdaug 03:01, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)
Not a problem. I'm glad to see someone putting a lot of work in the final fantasy series, so confusion or not, its great to see the pages improved. ZeWrestler 12:30 , 16 Jan 2005 EST

Computer role-playing game categorization

edit

Category:Final Fantasy is a subcategory of the CRPG category so having the FF articles in CRPG is redundant. RedWolf 05:33, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)

Trevor_belmont.gif

edit

I have deleted the Trevor_belmont.gif image, by your request. There's just something I'd like to inform you. When you want an image to be deleted, it's better to list it at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion, instead of Wikipedia:Votes for deletion. That page is more appropriate for this kind of thing. Also, it's better to add the "{{ifd}}" tag to images you want deleted, instead of the usual "{{vfd}}". That one is the one used for images, not articles.

Anyways, I deleted the old Trevor portrait on sight because it was already obsoleted by the one you added, so I don't think there was the need of discussing over something small like this. I know image deletion has no turning back (like article deletion does), but discussing over this wasn't really necessary, I believe.--Kaonashi 00:33, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Doctor Who

edit

I appreciate your contributions, but you should really read the articles (and the associated sub-articles) to make sure that you're not putting in duplicate information. I've had to remove such redundant info more than once already. Just FYI. -khaosworks 08:18, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I apologize for making the mistake earlier (esp. with the Evelyn Smythe article, as that was actually unintentional: I had been toying with rearranging the article for clarity, changed my mind, and thought I had set things back before submitting). But I do question the layout of the main article, specifically the "Format" section. I was fully aware that information regarding the TV movie and the webcasts were present elsewhere in the article, and hence I didn't go into great detail, but it seems that, in discussing the format of the series, it is important to mention the difference in format between the original series and the TVM (in the format section, no less). Or, at least, it did to me. Whatever.... – Seancdaug 08:49, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)
I see what you mean, but it's also plain from the section that we are discussing the weekly series format. I also think that the article doesn't need to mention the TV movie again when it's already been mentioned earlier. Please do continue contributing, though. We'll reach a consensus eventually. :) -khaosworks 09:05, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

FF for GB

edit

hey,

i was looking at the template that we did work on for ff and i was thinking that there are gameboy final fantasies in existance. do you think we should include some of those in the FF template? -ZeWrestler 20:10 17 Mar, 2005(UTC)

The problem is that GB Final Fantasy games aren't, technically speaking, Final Fantasy games (the three FF Legends being part of the SaGa series, and FF Adventure being part of the Seiken Densetsu series. For the purposes of keeping the template simple, I left them out: while they certainly could be included, on the basis that a large number of North American gamers are going to be aware of them as part of the series, they should probably be set off in their own section ("related titles" or something. But you should probably bring this up on the discussion page either at the main Final Fantasy article or for the template itself to see if anyone else has input. – Seancdaug 05:27, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)

Washington Nationals

edit

I am not to sure about your idea on the use of "Nats" nickname being derived for the second franchise form the Senators name. While you do make a compelling argument for the case, epically one that i would have not see or considered my self, i believe that the second franchise being called the Nats is more into relation of the first franchise being called the nationals. First the was no readjustment time between the first team leaving for Minnesota and the second team from coming in for sportswriters to start using Nats from the Senators, these were the same sportswriters covering the new Senators as the departed team. And if they were to derive a nickname from Senators I would put money on it being “Sens”, as is used in Ottawa with the NHL Ottawa Senators. Secondly I would think that the change you propose would have come earlier, the first franchise started using Senators on the jerseys in 1959 at least 2 years before the moved to Minnesota, I am not sure exactly when the team changed their name from Senators to Nationals, but from information that I have seen from interviews with sportswriters and broadcasters associated with Washington franchises state that the tame would have been call “Nats”, prior to ‘59 as well as following, making it’s usage for the second franchise more of a carry over from the original use rather then a new durative from “Senators”. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 05:23, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Ahh i see, and i agree with you on that point, so it more a question of the wording of what your trying to explain. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 05:47, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • I caugit your new edit, and i though about a tewak.

      both out of tradition. It should be noted that while the term "Nats" was derived from the frist franchise being called "Nationals", that nickmame could also be contuiuned threw the "Senators" as well.

      This Might clear up any ambugity that leads people like Wahkeenah going crazy, thoughts? --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 06:09, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
      • Thats better, thanks for the colerbation, i hope you didn't mind to much, as for the other party involed, i wouln't bother even dealing with him, unless he makes a edit to the page, he seems to be a s-stirrer of some type. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 06:21, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Not trying to be a s-stirrer, whatever that is (writing with a stutter?) just too much of a perfectionist for my own good. Appy polly loggies for the overkill on this trivial point, and for the rant against public funding of stadiums. - W.

Hey, several of the newer ballparks have pools, showers, etc. If they put a swimming pool in D.C. would they call it a NATatorium???

  • Hey if you have any weblinks to back up the info, you might want to post them by the footnote, just so that it is their. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 22:21, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Hey!

edit

Hey, Sean. Always cool to see another rac.* alumnus; just wanted to say hi. DS 19:55, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

edit

Thanks for the kind words. No, I've not really considered being an admin, really. Nobody's suggested before. --khaosworks 21:35, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, you can nominate me, but I'll doubt I'll get through the process. :) --khaosworks 22:14, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, it worked - to my surprise. Thanks for the support, and I'll do my best to live up to the responsibility and not wipe out the entire universe... well, or at least this little corner of it... in a fit of pique. Thanks again! --khaosworks 07:17, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your support

edit

Thank you for supporting my RfA; you won't regret it. I look foward to collaborating with you on gaming articles (who knows?). Cheers! Phils 19:44, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

FFVII

edit

Thanks for cleaning up the FFVII article. Before it was kind of a jumbled collection of facts about the game. Some time I was going to try and organise it, but you've done it for me.

You know, it's kind of funny to see such a big article on a video game in an encyclopedia.

Someone42 10:55, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

What do you think about submitting the Final Fantasy VII article for [peer-review], then hopefully have it be a [featured article]? Let me know your thoughts. EreinionFile:RAHSymbol.JPG July 3, 2005 22:17 (UTC)

Sin (Final Fantasy) and image alignment

edit

Mea culpa; thanks for the explanation. I am indeed using the Classic skin in WIkipedia - the three images in the article were being arranged in a horizontal row, and this had the effect of putting the article text in one thin column to the left of them. My "br clear=all" solved this for me, but I guess it was unnecessary if the images were stacked vertically. I think the recent edit which forces them to stack vertically is the best solution. (I don't understand why different skins would arrange article images differently, anyhows - maybe this is a WP bug.) - Brian Kendig 15:59, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

FFXI Wiki

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You might be interested in this FFXI Wiki. --Gahoo 19:14, 23 May 2005 (UTC)Reply


Ultimecia - Final Fantasy VIII

edit

Got a question about one of your edits to the Ultimecia article - I've posted it on the talk page of the article in question. Just wanted to give you a heads-up about it. 68.226.239.73

Weapon (Final Fantasy)

edit

What you did on Weapon (Final Fantasy) looks much better. I've been trying to find a way where we can include more images without it becoming a mess. Cheers! — Cuahl 5 July 2005 00:29 (UTC)

FFVII Reunion Tracks

edit

I like your work, you're really into it, but recently, I had added the same audio samples as the Final Fantasy VII Original Soundtrack on the Final Fantasy VII Reunion Tracks page except for the last three tracks which are arranged orchestral versions. You let my orchestral versions but you removed the first 16 tracks which were the same as the Final Fantasy VII OST while I'm pretty certain that the 16 first tracks are not arranged versions but the same as the in-game tracks. You can consult that article here. Please answer as soon as possible, either here, on my talk page or on the discussion page of the reunion tracks. DarkEvil July 5, 2005 15:09 (UTC)

Final Fantasy uniformity?

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hey, I hope you don't mind me coming to you for this, but you are really the only other active Wikipedian who does a large job on the Final Fantasy series on articles. The thing is, I've been looking through the articles and deciding on where bits need expanding so I can fill in the gaps in the next couple of days and realised the articles aren't very uniform. I'm not obsessive or anything, but if we're taking it upon ourselves to look over the set it may as well be nice eh? Maybe we should make some standard? I keep seeing differences in which spelling of Aeris/Aerith to choose, when really the spelling should be specific to the article surely? (ie. the difference between Final Fantasy VII and Kingdom Hearts). Tell me what you think (even if you think I'm being OTT and need a break) — Cuahl 5 July 2005 21:02 (UTC)

In reply: Damn mention of the fact there's a pokedéx did it for me. Right well you might as well throw yourself in charge. I mean, there's enough FF articles for a project and they're expanding more and more. Sounds like a plan! Keep me informed mate — Cuahl 6 July 2005 01:45 (UTC)
Count me in on this. I've been helping out as much as i could with FF articals. I'll be glad to help out some more, especially if a project starts up. --ZeWrestler 6 July 2005 01:54 (UTC)
Then it definately sounds like a plan. It's 3am where I am (UK) so I'm gonna catch up on sleep, and I'll be in touch tomorrow. — Cuahl 6 July 2005 01:57 (UTC)

in reply: I'm already one step ahead of you. =) Added my name to the list.--ZeWrestler 6 July 2005 03:55 (UTC)

On the topic of the new project I've had an idea. Obviously it would be brilliant to have FA status on FF articles, and I was thinking maybe we could find a way of deciding when articles can't really be improved or added to. But that means it needs to be judged. Do you think it's worth looking into? You've been a Wikipedian much longer than I have and have certainly been editing FF longer than most so I thought I'd ask on your talk page — Cuahl 22:55, 10 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Proposal 7 swing votes

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I convinced 2 people to change their votes to appose proposal 7 =) --ZeWrestler 19:19, 12 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Final Fantasy VII Terms article

edit

Alright, Seancdaug. I'm more or less ready to dissolve the terms page. If I'm to merge the Lifestream, Mako, and Materia articles, what should the composite article be called? ~ Hibana

Final Fantasy Pray

edit

Thanks for the info about the move. Yes, I just thought it was the complete name, but it seems I was wrong. I just picked the info from various websites, but the cover is clear about that. --DarkEvil 04:16, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Gameboxes, Coverart etc. for Castlevania et. al.

edit

Sean, good call on the "coverart gallery" on Castlevania: Lament of Innocence. I've uploaded quite a few CV images tonight, and for several articles ..that is a great idea for those games that have multiple platforms and/or multiple boxart images. You may see fit to "fix" other articles that I added these images to ...not that I'm asking you to "clean up" after me but its late and I'm tired and I may have not made the best choices on some of my picture placement :) I'll end up fixing some of this tomorrow. Thanks again, --Naha|(talk) 04:20, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Ok I followed your lead and made a coverart gallery on the Castlevania: Bloodlines page, look! look! I did it right lol :) I am also surprised there is not more interest and coverage on the CV articles! /boggle. I'll have to see what I can do as far as content ..when I'm more awake :) --Naha|(talk) 04:43, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Final Fantasy VI wins

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Without a surpise, Final Fantasy VI won the featured article drive. I posted some info here about what we can do, but i think i'll deffinetly need comments from you on this one to help get the task moving. I also created a CVG peer review for the article. --ZeWrestler 12:27, 19 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Take over FA drive

edit

Can you took the lead on handeling the Featured Artical drive for getting FFVI into FA status. I had a bike accident yesterday that resulted in a concussion. I can barly concentrate right now, and I'm actually having my brother type this note to you for me. At the moment, i'm useless for major edits and revisions. Hopefully i'll be able to recover soon, and get back to work on the article with you guys. Thanks in advance.--ZeWrestler Talk 15:17, 20 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Barnstar

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

 

I award you this Tireless Contributor barnstar for all the work you've put into expanding articles on video games. Keep up the good work! Y0u (Y0ur talk page) (Y0ur contributions) 19:49, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

Its well deserved, congratz Sean! :)--Naha|(talk) 19:56, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
Congrads --ZeWrestler|Talk 19:55, 19 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks

edit
 
The mop is mine!

Thanks for voting in my RfA; I promise I'll wield my sacred mop with care. If you ever need me for anything, you know where to find me. Thanks again! -- Essjay · Talk 15:15, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

FFVI peer review

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago4 comments1 person in discussion

how long do you think before we'll be ready to bring this article up for a regular peer review on wikipedia? --ZeWrestler Talk 17:52, 25 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

  • I know what you mean, I was hoping for a huger responce between the CVG community. So far, its been a select few of us working on improving the article. Any ideas for advertising? --ZeWrestler Talk 18:23, 25 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

So what is the current plan now for fixing up the fancruft? --ZeWrestler Talk 16:02, 29 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Do you think we're ready to bring the article up to a wikipedia wide peer review?--ZeWrestler Talk 14:35, 4 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Vandalism of History of South Africa in the apartheid era went undetected.

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi -- I just noticed that some wholesale vandalism of the History of South Africa in the apartheid era a couple of days ago went undetected until today. An anon replaced the entire text of the article with the old text of the Apartheid article, including the bit about "diaspora Jews." Since this seems to have slipped under everyone's radar (including mine), and I don't know who has History of South Africa in the apartheid era on their watchlist, I thought I'd give you a heads up. --Bcrowell 18:26, 30 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

WP:PJFF

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hey, I just wanted to give you a note about my latest comment on the talk page of Project Final Fantasy. I don't mean to undermine your creation of the project, and I just wanted your opinion on our own internal FF peer review? Any ideas? — CuaHL 14:30, 7 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

finishing touches on Final Fantasy VI

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Hey,

FFVI is finishing up its peer review. But help on the article has appear to start dropping a little bit. I haven't seen you around to help out recently, and I know you are on vacation, but when you get back, do you think you could go to the FFVI peer review and see if there are any changes/improvements you can make to the article? It would be to get your help on it. --ZeWrestler Talk 17:32, 22 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Ocean Remix linkspam

edit

Thanks for helping out, man. Reverting all those links was killing me ;-) --PhilipO 03:18, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

One look at FFVI before FAC

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago8 comments1 person in discussion

Hey, If you can, i'd really like you to take a look at the Final Fantasy VI article before i nominate it for FAC status. --ZeWrestler Talk 12:16, 26 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

FAC

edit

It has been almost 2 months since we had the featured article drive. Since then Final Fantasy VI has received a lot of work to get its status raised to FA. As of today, I have closed the peer review for the article and nominated the game for FAC, Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Final Fantasy VI. Please read the article over and vote appropriately. --ZeWrestler Talk 13:40, 31 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

I understand why you did what you did. You don't need to apologize. You explained the change perfectly in the FAC. If anything, ALTTP has made this a very debated FAC. I look forward to seeing the finished product when this is all complete. When you believe the time is correct you change your vote back, but otherwise, you changed it for the correct reason. --ZeWrestler Talk 00:08, 3 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

FF Game infobox

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

If anything after FAC is over, we should probally create a specific infobox for FF games. --ZeWrestler Talk 17:50, 2 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks!

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for reminding me to sign the article! I guess I was so caught up in finding good reasons to use a logo over boxart that I forgot to sign it... — WARPEDmirror 21:18, 2 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

FFVI Terra Table

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Just to clarify, did you remove it because you personally don't think it belongs there, or because you think others will object to it during the FAC? I thought it was a good illustration of the paragraph on graphics, and don't think it was adding content just for content's sake. -- Norvy (talk) 03:16, 4 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

I'll pass on saying it

edit

I'll just chip away at the prose. Revert my edits if you see fit. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:20, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Talk: Final Fantasy X-2

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hey there. I've posted some replies on the talk page. Feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or FFX-2 Talk page. Thanks! --Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 16:07, 9 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I noticed that these articles:

that you worked on in the past are now are up for deletion. Would you vote in favor of keeping these articles? They show the history of the advancement of video game graphics over time and are useful as a source of images for graphics for video game articles. --ShaunMacPherson 20:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

out for a while

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

hey,

unfortunetly, real life has taken over for a bit, and i'm on a mini-wiki vacation. if anything comes up on here, just contact me via aim. you should still have my sn. i'll check in occasionally here to see how things are going. take care. --ZeWrestler Talk 18:45, 25 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

Nice

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I like the idea of a FF project, like the articles too. Keep on Going! --Vodka Martini, Shaken Not Stirred 20:08, 26 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

FF6 Hopping Lancer

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

We both noticed the Hopping Lancer thing on the classes. (I'm actually the person that put those classes into the template.) I only put a note on the talk page when I saw it. Thanks for fixing it. However, there is still a mention of Hopping Lancer later in the text that I don't understand either. -- Myria 04:03, 2 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Square Enix-stub

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

Yes, perhaps I should have, but the best thing to do would be to merge the FF stub to Square Enix stub. Currently, with Square Enix and Final Fantasy separate, there's not enough articles to make an adequately sized template. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:44, 4 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Well, how about a subcategory to the one I made? It'll still be FF, but it'll still be grounds to keep the Square Enix stub template. Sound good? - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:50, 4 October 2005 (UTC)Reply
Well, you'll have to repopulate it for me, as I have to populate Template:Konami-stub, Template:Capcom-stub, Template:Square Enix-stub (unless an FF fan would like to do that one *hint hint*) and Template:Namco-stub. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:56, 4 October 2005 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Seancdaug/archive1&oldid=1141029891"