User talk:Sephiroth BCR/Archive 5

FL Main page proposal

You either nominated a WP:FLC or closed such a nomination recently. As such, you are the type of editor whose opinion I am soliciting. We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 1 2007, voting starting December 1 2007 and main page appearances starting January 1 2008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual content will resemble the current content at the featured content page. Such output would probably start at the bottom of the main page. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Another clone article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naruto_clash_of_ninja_revolution

Since I don't know how to delete these, I thought I'd let you try.Darth G 05:03, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Re:Barnstar

Do I really need to comment on these things? They're gonna be a featured list anyway. You don't need my opinion. You're already doing a good damn job anyway. σмgнgσмg 05:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Alright then, I will help. =) σмgнgσмg 05:36, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Oops, my bad. Sorry. σмgнgσмg 05:42, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I just left a comment there but I still feel that there should be more sources. Don't know why, but I just do. I know there's not an argument where you can just say "I like it" or "I don't", so I changed it to neutral because I took account in what you said. σмgнgσмg 06:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying it for me. Changed my view once again. σмgнgσмg 06:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Glad to help out with the FL nomination, one way or another. σмgнgσмg 06:10, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

VP

Hey, I also noticed that you have VP like I do. Does it work for you? Because I can't seem to get mine to work. σмgнgσмg 06:18, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

naruto

ok i if i cite sources and so on then don't keep reverting it back the man in the discussion that u linked did not make sense. i am refering to madara being tobi i mean seriously it is insane to think that madara is tobi by those few words. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.174.21.173 (talk) 01:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 42	15 October 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Brion Vibber interview
Wikimania 2008 awarded to Alexandria	Board meeting held, budget approved
Wikimedia Commons reaches two million media files	San Francisco job openings published
Community sanction noticeboard closed	Bot is approved to delete redirects
License edits under consideration to accommodate Wikipedia	WikiWorld comic: "Soramimi Kashi"
News and notes: Historian dies, Wiki Wednesdays, milestones	Wikimedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Military history	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 10:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Dawn of Sorrow

Looks doable. The draft looks to be in very good shape and could be incorporated into the first half of the article as it is. However I feel I should tell you that I'm been feeling a little burned out on Wikipedia and plan on taking a short break after Characters of Kingdom Hearts and Organization XIII get to GA and they, along with the music, universe, and media list, get added to the KH FT. But that may take a while; the WP:GAN is backed up and is moving slowly. It does seem like a project I'd like to help out with though, but I don't think I'll be able to give it my full attention right now. So I apologize if I only help a little and in irregular intervals. If you take the lead I'll help out as best I can. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC))

Dang man, you went to town on that article. It looks really good. I'll try to do some copy editing this weekend if I have time. If not I'll do it Monday. Kudos to you man. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC))

Congrats on the GA, it is definitely a good article. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:25, 22 October 2007 (UTC))

Closing FL Nomination List of WCW World Heavyweight Champions

I was under the (obviously mistaken) impression that the nominator was supposed to close the discussion. Is it possible to reopen it? GaryColemanFan 02:44, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I really messed that one up. I thought I was supposed to promote it, and I was sure it had been 10 days. I'll just leave things like that alone from now on. I think I've undone the damage. Thanks again for helping me straighten it out. GaryColemanFan 02:51, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Luigi6138

Might I know why I was warned? The sentence was terribly worded, and a citation would have been good. Having read through the entire manga to date, I do NOT recall seeing that. I'll accept the warning, but I would really like to know why. Luigi6138 18:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I understand now. Thank you very much for the clarification. I will ensure that it will not happen again. Luigi6138 18:50, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Dawn of Sorrow GA review

Well, I guess the best thing to do would be to assume good faith. Like you said, they probably have a lack of understanding of the GA criteria, this looks to be their second review. Technically you can directly challenge their review, but I think the prudent course of action would be to ask them how the article doesn't meet the criteria. When reviewing, the reviewer has to leave details as to why it doesn't meet the criteria and try to offer some suggestions to improve it. They didn't really do that, so it wouldn't be out of line to ask for a detailed review from them.

Some suggestions just from looking at their user page and their comments. They probably feel that some aspect of the WP:MOS has not been satisfied, they mentioned it twice. Find out what that aspect is and debate it. They may not have examined other GA game articles for comparison or measurement, their first GA review was for the element xenon. Maybe give some examples of GA game articles, like Crash of the Titans, The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, or Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin (to be honest, I'd say DoS is a better article than PoR). I'm watching the talk page too and I'll jump if needed. If worst comes to worst, we can always go to Wikipedia:Good article reassessment. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 23:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC))

Thanks

Thanks for the comments you left on my talk page. I reviewed the articles you left, and looks that I'm going to make changes in my GA review. Macys123 19:31, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

1. I left some comments on Talk:Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow, and would greatly appreciate your response. Macys123 19:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Macys123 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia Users' Alliance

Please note: this message is being sent out to all involved parties. Dear Friend, the Wikipedia Users’ Alliance has been deleted. I am sure that perhaps you already knew this. I myself just found out. Anyhow during the debate many mean and rude things where said. I am not innocent myself; I too contributed to the unpleasantness. But now Wikipedia Users’ Alliance is dead, gone forever. But we all must move on, for me and my friends, we have to deal with this loss. However it is important that all of us work together to fight vandalism and not argue with one another. There are many things that I want to say, but I know that they would only add to the mean sprit that fills the “air”. As a Buddhist (Risshō Kōsei Kai) I was reading the Holy Dhammapada yesterday. I came across this line, “Holding onto anger is like holding on to a hot coal with the intent to throw it at someone, in the end you are the one who gets burned,” how true! Lets us progress forward. WUA Founder User: King of Nepal has expressed similar views such as these to me via e-mail. His majesty said, “We have to move on, move forward. It is in the best interest of Wikipedia and us all.” I agree and hope that you do to. Thanks. --Greenwood1010 13:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)Co-founder of the WUA. If you feel that you recived this message in error please let me know. Feel free to responed on my page if you wish.

Reply

Why can't you just start a new nomination? There wasn't active discussion, and it wasn't heading towards an oppose, so I had justification for closing it. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The FLC process isn't about sending through articles quickly so that they can get that little star. It's about examining and reviewing a page and getting suggestions so it can be perfect. The page will still be around in 10 days, Wikipedia will still be around in 10 days, and having to go through a second FLC will not make the page any less of an accomplishment. My policy is that I never reopen an FLC unless an opposer specifically requests it, so if you can get Circeus to request it, then I will reopen it. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:09, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Claymore chapters

Actually, a fresh, blank nom (rather than a mere reactivation of the closed one) seems better (if only so it doesn't look like the thing is filled with actual conversation). If that is what you mean, than go ahead, I sure wouldn't mind. Merely reopening the previous nom is unlikely to gather much fresh comments. Circeus 22:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:KiraShikaiBleachMovie.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:KiraShikaiBleachMovie.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. BetacommandBot 15:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Izuru Kira

I must've missed the discussion, but where was it decided to finally merge the Izuru Kira article? -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 18:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Then why don't we revert? We have not given in to various persistent vandals in the past, why should we do so now? If AFKAWC keeps on doing it, there's always RFC, ANI, etc. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 18:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

His actions do constitute as vandalism, because numerous discussions have been had about this, which reached no consensus. Examples: here and here. In both cases, a lot of words have been said, but because there was no agreement, it was contrary to Wikipedia policy to change the original state. Similarly to how AfDs are closed - you can't delete an article on AfD unless there's clear consensus and/or majority of vote for deletion. When no consensus is reached (not necessarily keep), then the article is kept by default. What we had here was an unofficial AfD and therefore the article should be kept, end of story. If AFKAWC disagrees, he should feel free to start an AfD and have the article merged as a result if most of the users agree. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 01:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Dawn of Sorrow

I've replied on the GAR page, and my apologies... hbdragon88 04:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I found one thing that needs notice, but otheerwise...I have a very heavy-handed approach to articles, I fix up the worst of them and add huge swaths of information. I'm not too good at pushing already well-developed ones to higher status. (Also, due to the types of articles I work on, development sections are hard to source, meaning most are doomed to B-class standing, like Big Rigs.) hbdragon88 04:48, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:NnoitraBleachMangaChapter291.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:NnoitraBleachMangaChapter291.png. 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. BetacommandBot 13:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 43	22 October 2007	About the Signpost

Fundraiser opens, budget released	Biographies of living people grow into "status symbol"
WikiWorld comic: "George Stroumboulopoulos"	News and notes: Wikipedian Robert Braunwart dies
WikiProject Report: League of Copyeditors	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you.

Hey, i wasnt trying to bust anybody balls. I just wanted it to make sense for the nubes and those who havent caught up. The way you have it now accomplishes this. I just want you to know, i couldnt find any other way to discuss it with you, the talk function wasnt available. Sorry for this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lunar Eclipz (talk • contribs) 06:01, October 31, 2007

Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 44	29 October 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Florence Devouard interview
Page creation for unregistered users likely to be reenabled	WikiWorld comic: "Human billboard"
News and notes: Treasurer search, fundraiser, milestones	WikiProject Report: Agriculture
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Dawn of Sorrow PR

To be quite honest, I'm not too sure what else to really add. Hahnchen already commented on the sales figures (the fact that that's all they commented on is a plus). I'll see if I can find anything on that. The only other thing that comes to mind would be to maybe add some information about the setting like a brief description of the time and Dracula's castle like Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin#Plot and setting. Of course more sources and more content in the "Development" section is always a plus for FA game articles. But other than that, it seems to cover the main aspects of the game. Unless you know of any special merchandise that may have been released in Japan or Europe? Other than those I'd say it's a pretty solid article man, you did an excellent job on it. I guess wait and see what everyone else says. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:48, 3 November 2007 (UTC))

Dang, man you beat me to it :-P You're on fire with this article. I'll see if I can find anything else. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC))

Re: Musing

That certainly is a compelling idea. And I must admit, SotN has been on my list of articles to improve. I would certainly like to see that make it to FA. Though I'm not that familiar with most of the games; the only ones I ever played were the original NES one (never beat), Simon's Quest (got lost and never beat), PoR, DoS, and SotN. I don't know if I'd have time to be on a task force, but I'd certainly help out with the List of Castlevania titles, SotN, the main Castlevania article, and general clean up/copy editing of others. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC))

Re: Possible Featured Topic

That certainly sounds like a possible FT. Like you said, there are no apparent violations of the criteria. I say go for it, be bold remember. I'd support it. You may get some flack for it being a pop culture topic, but we get that anyway for the stuff we work on. I'd also recommend checking out the Lists of World Wrestling Entertainment champions topic on the September FT log to get an idea for what to expect during the nomination since that too was a topic comprised of pop culture lists. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC))

LOTD proposal

You have nominated a recent successful WP:FL. There have been two recent proposals to begin a List of the Day feature on the main page, which have both received majorities but have not been approved as overwhelming support sufficient for the main page. WP:LOTDP is a new proposal to try to get the ball rolling based on the original proposal. Voice your thoughts on its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

YuYu Hakusho episodes

Amazing, I can't believe you upgraded those pages by yourself. My many thanks to you. Would you happen to own any of the manga? Now the remaining problem is rewriting the character pages, because they suck. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 00:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay

Okay... Tyar 11:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Naruto chapters

I'm good with that. Might need some disambig in the lead. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 02:49, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Featured lists

Hey. So I noticed that you nominated three YuYu Hakusho lists at WP:FLC. It's obvious alot of work went into those, so great job. However, I'd like to highly recommend to you that you nominate one similarly-themed article at a time. Not only does it overload the already backlogged FLC list, but some comments might be made in one that may affect the others - and if there's a bunch of YuYu lists all nominated at once, any overarching suggestions might be lost. Just a suggestion. Good luck on getting them featured. Drewcifer 23:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Image names

Thanks for uploading Image:19022.jpg as a replacement. However, please try to give images meaningful names when you upload them. Pagrashtak 22:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Whoops—I didn't even bother to look at the uploader. Sorry about that. Pagrashtak 22:15, 12 November 2007 (UTC)