User talk:Erik the Appreciator

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To communicate with Erik... is to be alive.

Well, okay, that's not exactly subtle. Okay, so I don't have much of a talk-page policy, just a preference with talking style; If I leave a message on your talk page, you can either reply there or on here. When you leave a message on this page, though, I'll respond on this page instead of going to your talk page.

And also, with nomenclature; "Erik the Appreciator" is my user name to keep in character on the site, but you can just call me Erik (Jensen) wherever I show up. In the event anyone calls me "Mr.Appreciator", well, retribution will be swift... and final. *cackles like these guys*

Alrighty then, the space below is open up to any and all posts regarding my Wikipedia edits. Just keep it relevant! Erik Jensen (I appreciate talk!)

Contents

[edit] About the images on your user page

If I remember correctly, images under Fair Use cannot be used on user pages, because it's not fair use anymore. I'll look up to get proof on that, but I think you're going to have to remove them. Sorry, I know it's a pain. :-( -- Deskana (talk) 19:32, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I found it. Taken from Wikipedia:Fair Use
"Fair use images should only be used in the article namespace. Used outside article space, they are often enough not covered under the fair use doctrine. They should never be used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages. They should be linked, not inlined, from talk pages when they are the topic of discussion. This is because it is the policy of the Wikimedia Foundation to allow an unfree image only if no free alternative exists and only if it significantly improves the article it is included on. All other uses, even if legal under the fair use clauses of copyright law, should be avoided to keep the use of unfree images to a minimum. Exceptions can be made on a case-by-case basis if there is a broad consensus that doing so is necessary to the goal of creating a free encyclopedia (like the templates used as part of the Main Page). "
I'll leave you to remove them, I think it's rather rude for me to do it myself. Thanks. Deskana (talk) 19:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Hm, well! Thanks for the heads up. Yeah alright, it is a shame that those Pokemon images will have to be taken down, thus removing the visual aspect of my user page, but this is just the sort of honest talk-page post that I like to see coming from other people logged on to the site, so I thank you for your example! Erik the Appreciator (talk) 12:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mewtwo articles

Yeek. I wish I had noticed this before; my fault, since you were dropping notes on my talk page and all.

There are a lot of problems with the Mewtwo (anime) page, problems which aren't really your fault but need to be dealt with nonetheless.

The biggest problem is that it is far, far too detailed. It has moved beyond being a plot summary and turned into a point-by-point description of every single appearance in the anime. You have 18' paragraphs summarizing First Movie; this is longer than the plot summary in any other character or movie article. Try to pare this way, way down. (I think you'll find if you do this, you can merge the articles back together.)

You also need to separate what real world people (such as fans and viewers of the anime) think and know about Mewtwo and what fictional characters know (such as Ash, Giovanni, and your typical Kanto/Johto/Hoenn resident). Uncle G has an interesting essay/policy proposal on this subject titled Describe This Universe; I do suggest you take a look at it.

The intro is POV. Thing is, I don't know what to do to replace "Mewtwo is one of the most dynamic and popular characters."

I take it you care quite a bit about getting Mewtwo up to good, if not featured status; my suggestion is that you take a look at Captain Marvel (DC Comics), one of the few featured articles on a fictional character. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Ah, but that's why I was giving so much advertisement about what I was up to; I knew that I was making it humongously detailed, probably to the point that it could be condensed into half the size, so I was making sure that I didn't startle anyone with a bunch of brazen edits. But whatever... Now that you're in the know (and I give kudos to you for being the first to make an official response), I'm hoping we can work together the next weeks to put it all in the proper format. (And I also love it whenever I am told honest things by other Wikipedians, however disappointing they might be to me, but this case wasn't really disappointing at all.) Let's keep in touch! Erik the Appreciator 18:09, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh, by the way, if you hadn't caught it before, all the text on the anime page was meant to be "raw footage", meant to be condensed and edited by ourselves the coming week, so the amount of detail was somewhat on purpose. I did that because I find that it's easier for me to come up with a quality summary from a lot of info text than to come up with a quality summary from scratch. Erik the Appreciator 19:12, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, as for the articles you're suggesting, a Captain Marvel-style article was never what I had in mind. In fact, the main reason why I considered splitting Mewtwo into a main article and an anime article was to avoid a page about a Pokemon that was much longer than Pikachu and Charizard. The characteristics/game info stuff in my sandbox right now aims to make the page as long as Charizard's, and adding the super-condensed anime info may or may not make Mewtwo the longest of the Pokemon creature articles. Erik the Appreciator 22:13, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

If you're planning to make a Mewtwo article longer than the articles than Pikachu (the most recognizable Pokémon, mascot for the entire series) or Captain Marvel (a character with a 70-year history, intimately linked to the change of the comics industry and a dispute between the two largest English-language comics publishers), you probably are going into far too much detail or are including far too much technical information or how-to advice. I can't say this for certain not having seen the sandbox, but try not to give advice, include anything you can't verify with reliable sources, or go into to much detail describing the works in which the character appears. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Um, like I say, I'm trying not to make it longer than the Pikachu article. In fact, that was the original reason for splitting the Mewtwo page, and also the reason why I'm saying that I'm trying to condense the raw material into a quality summary, with any help appreciated. Yeah, the idea is that after I implement the information and get feedback, I know how to condense it all properly. I'm sure it'll turn out the way we expect by the end. Erik the Appreciator 19:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Well! I finished the initial condensing phase of the Mewtwo (Anime) page, and you were right; It sure is a heck of a lot better now. The thing I notice now, though: Now it looks darn near impossible to condense the current text into what should be four or five big paragraphs, the small amount that would be necessary to merge it back into the main article, at least not without making it all a vague summary of the Mewtwo saga or without making the main page a good deal longer than the Pikachu article. I am trying not to overstuff the main Mewtwo page, after all. For that reason, I believe it was the right thing to split the Mewtwo page into a main page and an anime page.
Now, I always have back-up plans whenever doing official stuff online, and I have one for the Mewtwo anime page: If in the event Mewtwo as he stands in the anime is still not enough to warrant an entire Wikipedia article, then what can be done is make it a joint Mewtwo-and-Mew-in-the-anime page, because their respective sagas in the anime are both pretty involved and independent, and they are very closely intertwined. Of course, this page can also be treated as an extention of the Team Rocket Page, and/or the Giovanni page, alongside the Mewtwo and Mew pages. I see all sorts of different things that can be done here, but I'll need the feedback if I get around to it. Erik the Appreciator 03:07, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Golden Sun Project

Okay, now my focus is on giving major refinement edits to the Golden Sun pages of Wikipedia, so I’ve arranged this space here on my talk page, for you to make any comments you might like to make about my work. I would so be loving of praise or informative suggestions. [1] One thing; If you’re coming to tell me that I made it much too detailed, bear in mind that that’s my method of implementing big page edits-I make them very detailed so that I can get feedback from you and know better about how to condense it. But of course, that’s if my edits are accepted to be the right size. Erik the Appreciator 03:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah, about your piece on Kraden in the List of GS characters in your sandbox, Kraden came before the boulder disaster. When you talk to Kraden, he says Kyle and the others were good friends of his and he shares the Valeans' pain, so clearly he was there for quite some time before that terrible night, so you might want to change that part about Kraden coming after. (BTW, this is Kyarorain, who forgot to sign in and really is too tired to do so right now.) 66.205.8.2 02:49, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh okay, I'll write that into there. Thanks!
It is seeming obvious that I'm going to have to slice all these sections way down before I attempt to input it into the page, but of course that is the reason why I'm doing the sandbox approach. Once I'm done with the Ivan and Sheba write-ups, I'll find a way to make every one of these sections concise and crisp! Erik the Appreciator 18:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
I now have the complete draft of the page in my personal sandbox. Personally, it's hard to imagine how this can be condensed any more without deleting important information... But some comparisons with the FFTactics page reveals that the new GS page should be fine as is. After all, hero Isaac has less text about him than hero Ramza Beoulve, and anti-hero Alex's amount of text doesn't even come close to anti-hero Dycedarg's. I'll implement the new page into the actual article shortly. Erik the Appreciator 18:03, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Wow, you completely rewrote all of the golden sun pages? That is excellent! Good going! Dee man45 20:01, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, thank you! Yeah, basically, that's who I try to be as a Wikipedian: One who gives full retoolings and rewrites and what-not for any page that is lacking in good status, at least to pages on subjects which I am familiar with. Now I'm secretly hoping that people may start uploading some character portraits and other images into these pages like we see on all other RPG pages so that it's not all just text. Erik the Appreciator 17:00, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Pokemon articles

Eric, wasn't trying to be an a-hole on the new Pokemon articles (No matter how much I truly hate and despise Pokemon). Since it seems unavoidable that the articles are going to be here, they should at least not contain any speculation. The last edit you made (in the article where we had the little edit war there, I forget it was one of the three), anyhow that was PERFECT. "Not known at this time". Brilliant!  :) I haven't looked at the other two, but I will. You seem to be the first of the crowd that "got it". Anyhow peace out.... Oscar Arias 08:47, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey hey - it's all right, I'm always "peaced out". I always make it a point to avoid any sort of conflict here, and if you say you're not an a-hole, I'll believe it. But you have to know that at the time I made that edit I honestly wasn't aware of your agenda as described on your user page, and in fact it was only yesterday where I learned about Wikipedia's No Original Research policy... believe it.
Now, several things: You might want to communicate with User:A_Man_In_Black, one of the principle drivers of the WP:PCP. This guy hates cruft about as much as you do, and he knows how to control it when he sees it. He can probably tell you how you’re society against speculative fancruft should operate so that it works best for the site.
If you want a similar franchise that is full of potentially undeserving pages... get a load of the Digimon section. There's hundreds of practically empty stub articles there! (Examples including Keramon, Murmuxmon, Gizamon, and Kimeramon, as a sampling) I think it is stubby and perhaps crufty enough to make the Pokemon section look like Encyclopedia Brittanica articles in comparison. But anyway...
As I said, you're totally right in that speculative fancruft is something to avoid like the plague, because it is not necessary to have a lot of that in articles for an encyclopedia, and that it should be trimmed from any Wikipedia articles that have it in general. If you adopt this outlook and stay at that, your society might be wholly successful. In the meantime, I’ll make sure personally that I don’t include speculative fancruft or original research the next time a new Pokemon comes. Erik the Appreciator 21:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Big mistake

You've mentioned Rollercoaster Tycoon on your userpage. You're going to get me hooked on it again! I don't want to go there again... I have too many other games! It's so good, isn't it? What did you think of RCT3? --His Imposingness, the Grand Moff Deskana (talk) 21:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Heh heh, well, I guess I should...apologize? The complete RCT1 I've had for many years, yet it's only recently that I've been able to summon the courage to start completing the Corkscrew Follies scenarios (I've done the first eleven within the last two months, now on Sprightly Park), and also I just bought the complete RCT2 a couple weeks ago. In short, I haven't tried RCT3 yet, and I don't plan to because my computer isn't really cut out for any sort of 3D. But I don't mind, because the prior two are more "pure," somehow, designed specifically by that Sawyer dude.Erik the Appreciator 21:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I've got to admit, I still long for RCT1 sometimes having played RCT3. It's not quite the same. Getting to try out your rides doesn't give you a feel for whether the people will like it or not and sometimes the game seems a bit buggy- I had a ride which had rating High Medium Low and I put a tunnel in and it became Low Low Low. Weird. --Deskana (talk) 22:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A barnstar

The Original Barnstar
A barnstar for doing a full rewrite of the Shuppet article. Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 20:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Oh, wow, I'm honored as heck! I've been hoping for one of these for a while now. Thanks for the award! Erik the Appreciator 20:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Do you need help?

Hello Erik the Appreciator, would you like me to help you with any articles, because I would be glad to help you work on any article you want, especially Pokémon articles. I would gladly fix stubs, clean up articles, expand sections, or anything else. Im also trying to help stop vandalism. If you would like me to do anything for you, leave a message on my talk page, thanks Cute Minun(Talk) 19:12, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm actually just fine with the Pokemon creature articles I've been working on and plan to work on continually, personally, but thanks for offering. In the ideal world, you'd be cleared like most other editors to work on all the "In the Pokemon anime" sections on all the undereveloped Pokemon creature articles because my edits are all about the Biology, Game, and Card sections on each of these articles.
But as for the sock puppet issue; Basically, there's this real moral code on Wikipedia that's totally against creating multiple accounts, which would be considered about as bad as wearing red and white at a funeral, which basically means that when you create your first account you're condemned to editing only under that name (in this case Iloveminun). Frankly, I'm not sure if anything on Wikipedia allows for changing one's username. I don't combat rulebreakers like other users, so I can only give you advice based on your conversations with A Man In Black: Wait out the block, then as Iloveminun ask politely if there is a legal Wikipedia method on changing names while refraining from making any more accounts, and afterwards promise to edit while keeping away from preventable disputes. Regards, Erik the Appreciator 20:04, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Weyard map

Could you link me to the actual site it was found on? -- Steel 19:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks like it came from this site, and I'll email the webmaster to see if he can release the copyright and all that mumbo jumbo. That site hasn't been updated since 2002 though, so let's hope the contact info on there is still up to date. -- 19:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Even if they do show up, the folds wouldn't be that hard to Photoshop out would they? -- Steel 19:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
I've just received a delivery failed message. Looks like the email address on that site doesn't exist anymore... or something. -- Steel 19:32, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Weyard map

Hello there! I have checked the image, and I am supposing you own the game (or at least the map) and have scanned it, as you have stated in the image. Images like this one are copyrighted, which usually prevents modification to the original image, including cropping or editing. Thus, I suggest you scan the image again, and upload it the way it is, even if it does not have the names of the locations. In that case, you could tag it as {{promotional}}. There is no specific tag for that image, so the you need to choose the closer one, in this case, we are assuming the image was created by the copyright holder to spread knowledge about the world in which the game is played. You could also draw the map by hand, taking care never to overpass the quality of the original image. You could upload modified versions if the image were free, but it is subject to copyright and thus it is not possible to do so. -- ReyBrujo 02:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I was referring to that kind of cropping. Do specify in the image page that, due technical reasons (the scanner size), it was not possible to create a full image and that instead a small region was cropped. That should be enough to prevent anyone from thinking you have cropped some copyright information out of the image. -- ReyBrujo 02:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
It is now better. Some may complain that the image is too big (nobody agrees what "big" is). I think it is a bit too big, but since I don't own the original map, I can't say if it is that big or not. Don't forget the Fair use rationale, and to mark both other as orphaned not used so that they can be deleted in a week. Even lawyers have problem stating what Fair use is, so it is possible others will question the image in one or another way (invalid license, too big, etc). If that happens, remember to stay cool and consider what they say. -- ReyBrujo 04:24, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:GSWeyard.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:GSWeyard.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, not to worry folks, I'm letting that image and Image:GSWeyard2.jpg be deleted by themselves over time. It's Image:GSWeyard3.jpg that I'm keeping, and that's properly presented in copyright. Erik the Appreciator 20:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: More Golden Sun images

Looks as though they'd be fair use like the others. Check out WP:FUC and bear in mind points 3 and, in particular, 8. Personally, I think there's enough images on the Golden Sun and Golden Sun: The Lost Age pages already. -- Steel 23:00, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed you placed the images where they're directly relevant to the article, which I thought was good. If you have any specific requests about wording or whatnot, I'm right here. -- Steel 23:49, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Free barnstar for everyone

For everyones contributions in the PCP, I hereby award this barnstar to all PCP members.

The Original Barnstar
For all your contributions to the Pokémon Collaborative Project, you are awarded a barnstar, Minun (talk) 17:21, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for that. Promote the Wiki-love and focus on complimenting each other's work instead of partaking in any more preventable disputes, and we all really will appreciate each other and get room to focus on what's important (Poke-article editing). Erik the Appreciator 18:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: "The"

I think that we definately need a discussion. In my opinion, "The Donphan is" looks ugly, whereas, "Donphan are" is much nicer. But, if there's a consensus otherwise, I don't mind following it. Many thanks, —Celestianpower háblame 10:51, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About the AWDS rewrite

I saw this in my watchlist and went "WTF? This can't be good..." But dude. You're awesome. You made the article good and not long and a bunch of other things I made it that weren't good about it. I'm going to start looking over the redesign, but structurally, I think you've hit the nail on the head here. The old version was getting too long for it's own good. I commendeth thee. ;) -- gakon5 03:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Aw, shucks, I'm flattered. ^_^ Yeah, basically, I was away from Wikipedia for awhile and still will be for a 'lil while longer, so to occupy myself I saved the previous pages onto my hard drive and worked each article from the ground-up over a three-day period. Now I hope that everyone else will read all of it before they begin editing it for themselves. And by the way, you probably didn't know that while I played both GBA games, I never actually played the game on DS (cuz I don't own one), but I was able to write all I did because of how much overstuffed info was on it already. Thanks for the thoughts! Erik Jensen (I appreciate talk!) 03:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Problems

  • Not to be mean, but the newbs are taking over! It's all the group of new or returning editors and they seem to gang up and try and change the colours of all the templates because "pinks for girls!" Also, I don't particularly want to be called "Wikiproject Pokémon".
  • The standard has dropped, look at the group of 4th Gen Pokémon Lividore and I did, such as Cherimu and Naetle, now look at Pinpuku and [[Subomi. The actual layout is horrid, and they all riddled with POV, with no real content. Also, there's POV in all the old articles (well new old ones).
  • There's navigation boxes, everywhere! No one discussed this, and they just sprung up, with not that great a quality either.
  • They're trying to delete everything, there was even an editor listing each one he posted for deletion proudly on his userpage. And quite a lot of the information is decent, just not significant enough, which is why I suggested List of locations in the Pokémon anime, or something similar. Not that anyone heard.
  • Cherimu got moved to Cherrim for no reason.
  • Vandalism is going more or less unchecked. Max and Ash have been hounded, and there's so many edits, people are reverting quite far down a page, and still hitting a vandalised version. There's also POV and fan information everywhere.
  • There's a ton of Japanese episode articles floating around, which are near on tat, not tagged with spoiler information or prose anywhere. They're probably breaching fair use with that many pictures, and such little text.


At which poinr, I began to scream. I've been trying to get Torchic on the Main Page September 28, but getting nothing back. And this lot is kinda *imitates being crushed*. And my hair is not orange, it's brown with dyed bright red tyips. ;) Highway Daytrippers 17:32, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

(laughs) Were you kidding? No offence, but the last time I was here, AMIB was in meltdown. Maybe he's changed? He could do with leaving warnings on vandal talk pages. I hope he's better, Highway Daytrippers 17:45, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk page abuse

Someone just had the nerve to abuse me on my talk page regarding the List of Characters in Golden Sun page, threatening to report me for vandalism. I fail to see how removing unnecessary information constitutes as vandalism. Is it really even necessary to have Japanese characters on the page? Besides, that's just outright rude of him... I've been helping on that page for months and the jerk just came out of nowhere and now he's acting like he owns the page?! It's rude and annoying... can you give him some rationale? Because I don't think I'm in a state to discuss it with this rude person. The message is still on my talk page for you to see. Kyarorain 14:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. Well, sorry if I sound a bit blunt, but both of you aren't being correct in the way you guys are going about this; while it's true that he's violating policy by inserting it there repeatedly without bringing it to the list's talk page where there can be a community discussion, making edit summaries like "revert vandalism" multiple times when that was not warranted, and being as unnecessarily rude and uncivil on your talk page like you said, you weren't being the image of fairness yourself in how you chose to respond; it's just not right to revert him multiple times and call on him to "cease at once" instead of bringing it to the list's talk page. The talk page to any article is where these issues always go to be resolved, and not revert warring on the page itself. And I feel I have to emphasize a very important policy on this site: Under no circumstance is launching any personal attack, let alone one that uses language like "dumb$h!+", ever warranted on this site (fortunately you removed that a moment ago). Do try to keep cool when the editing gets hot, as another policy says; I don't think anyone's in the spotlight right now, but I'm somewhat worried that you'll get a "No Personal Attacks warning" on your page if you let what would be considered a common Wiki-noob get under your skin. I always look for ways to prevent disputes between other users, so what I'm hoping for now is seeing a discussion on the list page's talk page where there can be a community discussion regarding the Japanese name issue. This discussion is what will have to happen before the page gets unprotected, and I'll try to be around for it. And don't think I'm criticizing you for anything, as I'm sure these feelings happen to the best of us sooner or later. Hope this'll work out. Best, Erik Jensen (I appreciate talk!) 21:32, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pokemon headers

Hi Erik, i was gone for a day, and had been hoping when i came back someone would have responded to this. However i realize that another discussion (the species merging) became a hot topic that needed attention. I was just writing to ask if you could respond to my questions and concerns regarding my current header project? -Zappernapper 21:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'll try, but it seems likely that that subject won't be discussed by the community at large until after there's a decision to keep the 493 articles the way they are; in any other case, the headers discussion may end up as good as moot. You should consider making some comments at the other discussion in the meantime because right now it looks almost like a three-person talk (Erik and Highway vs. AMIB: A landmark case?) Thanks, though. Erik Jensen (I appreciate talk!) 00:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Castlevania

The {{Castlevania series}} template is now in full effect, however I am a bit puzzled by our own Castlevania (video game) article which refer to Vampire Killer as a port. Any idea if it is? Combination 20:15, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, to be frank (whoever Frank is... ^_^), I don't know all that much about the Castlevania series because I've only played the recent handheld titles, and none of the other games. I made the Sorrow characters page because after I played Dawn of Sorrow, I realized that having played Aria of Sorrow I now know all about the "future section" of the series timeline. And Circle of the Moon and Harmony of Dissonance are about the only other Castlevania games I played (emulation of the old NES games aside), so I really don't know about the original game's relation to Vampire Killer; in fact, I never even heard of Vampire Killer until I found Wikipedia in the first place. It's nice that the new template has the sorrow characters page, though. Thanks. Erik Jensen (I appreciate talk!) 00:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/r/i/User_talk%7EErik_the_Appreciator_50c0.html"