User talk:JackSparrow Ninja/Archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] July 2006

[edit] Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, JackSparrow Ninja, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Garion96 (talk) 12:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Twilight Princess reverts

Please discuss the current Twilight Princess reverts here before reverting again, thanks. -- ReyBrujo 20:05, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dolphin

Many, many, many species have sex for plesure. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Wind Waker interview

Hey thar,

Let me know if/when you find that TWW interview where Aonuma restates the 100 years to hundreds. I know it's true indeed, but re-finding it is another thing. Good work on keeping the Zelda articles correct. Keep it up.

greets Martijn martijngamer@gmail.com

Sure!
That's what I like to do in the end.
You love something, you take care for it.
Nice job on your site btw. JackSparrow Ninja 22:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Takt

Regarding this edit, you said to see the talk page, but didn't leave a comment. Pagrashtak 03:40, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] August 2006

[edit] Kodai no Sekiban

Please consult the Kodai no Sekiban talk page before reverting the article again: Talk:BS The Legend of Zelda: Kodai no Sekiban#Title mistranslation. Guermantes 05:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Consulted it, and the story says it's Ancient Stone Tablets rather then your version. That's why I said, first make your point. JackSparrow Ninja 06:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

You're being absurd and childish. The part about the title mistranslation was posted about "Ancient Stone Tablets" not "Stone Tablets of Antiquity". Did you even read the discussion? I suggest you take a closer look, because you are obviously not familiar with it (or the language in general). There is a lengthy explanation about what each character means and why "Stone Tablets of Antiquity" is grammatically superior and truer to the denotation of the original Japanese. There has been no cited official translation. Until one is produced, the most accurate translation should stand. Guermantes 22:22, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Lordzeddhuman.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lordzeddhuman.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 17:07, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] September 2006

[edit] list of worst games

hello jackSparrow, an anonymous user wants these two games which are South Park Rally and Robocop added to the list of worst games ever, to be honest i would love to dicuss those games for him or her but the problem is that i just dont have them games. if he or she desperately wants them there, what can i do? many thanks. Touth 20:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

jackSparrow, i have just discussed what i thought about South Park Rally. its not much but at least i discussed about it which might help. i have not yet discussed about Robocop but i will soon ok? happy editing! Touth 21:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
hello jackSparrow, i have now discussed about Robocop. i hope my feedbacks have helped you and the other users! many thanks for your kindness. happy editing my friend! Touth 23:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Twilight Princess boxart

Yes, the {{fair use reduced}} tag only indicates administrators that older versions of the image should be deleted because they were too big or high resolution for Wikipedia. By the way, you should not blank your talk page except when archiving, as that may be considered vandalism. -- ReyBrujo 15:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FIFA 07 Box

You were right it was the cache. Great image for the article by the way, thanks! // Laughing Man 04:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] October 2006

[edit] After Burner: Black Falcon

What's your problem with the article?
I think the way it's put it's pretty neutral, but I said you could reword if you don't like it.
Removing the entire piece of information is, sorry to say, bogus. JackSparrow Ninja 02:29, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

It's not information, it's ad copy, and it's clearly copied and pasted from somewhere. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:30, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
What is ad copy? It comes from the official website, which was added as reference, and the text added to make it neutral. How is information on the number and sorts of airplanes ad copy? Don't be rediculous please. JackSparrow Ninja 02:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
I've deleted the whole mess as an advertisement. Encyclopedia articles do not use language such as "With an emphasis on speed and firepower, you will haul ass over deserts, mountain ranges, forests, and blast into high-altitude combat in a number of high-speed missions. Then invite your friends into co-op games to help you get better scores and earn more cash. Then buy engine and weapon upgrades, and customize your paint job to create your own personalized jet fighter." - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:48, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Which is why I have said, reword it if you don't like it. This is blatant vandalism from your side. Please get your act together and don't go abusing your power please. JackSparrow Ninja 02:50, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Articles which are blatant ads should be deleted on sight; this was recently added to the criteria for speedy deletion. That was a blatant ad. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:54, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

You are turning away from the point. It was information, which if in your eyes it was an ad, could be reworded. Which I suggested. Please explain to me why you don't want to reply on you ignoring the request to reword it if you had a problem with it. JackSparrow Ninja 02:57, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
I didn't want to reword it because I'm not in the mood to help a blatant ad squeak by. Feel free to reword it yourself if you want the article on Wikipedia, but please don't replace content that doesn't even bother to pay lip service to Wikipedia's purpose. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zelda image

Hello, I changed the image because the source of the original one is currently offline, so it can't be verified. The image I added was the official one according to IGN, I didn't know it was incorrect (though I noticed the different colors). I have now found this one on Amazon and it is similar to yours, but a bit darker. I don't understand why they are all different, but if you don't mind I would like to replace the current one with the one from Amazon (it's not watermarked). Mushroom (Talk) 01:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello Mushroom.
They've made it from this photo, which is an event where Nintendo officially showed it. The IGN one is too light, and the Amazone one is too dark. I think the Amazone one will do untill Land of the Legend is back. I'm just carefull on what is placed how and where, since there are so many different.
Thank you for watching out for it though. Happy editting! JackSparrow Ninja 01:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I have found a better one, still on Amazon. It's almost identical to the one from Land of Legend, so I have uploaded it. Happy editing! Mushroom (Talk) 01:56, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Ace! Thanks for letting me know. JackSparrow Ninja 02:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Zendokumpscreenshot.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Zendokumpscreenshot.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 03:08, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] November 2006

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Tloztp twilightking.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tloztp twilightking.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 07:08, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Tloztp princesszelda.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tloztp princesszelda.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 08:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Winning Eleven vandalizing

Hey MrBronson,

Just thought I'd let you know I've put a protection on the Winning Eleven so that editing of the article by unregistered or newly registered users is disabled. I hope this will help. Let me know if there's any further problems.

greets JackSparrow Ninja 19:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Sarahfisher.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sarahfisher.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok 20:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Linkspam

I noticed that you added a link to an outside Zelda site to The Legend of Zelda: The Triforce Trilogy. This is linkspam. Don't do it, it will only get reverted and get you blocked. Scepia 06:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

But why was the link ever on there? It seems like advertising a site that that doesn't need to be linked to. Scepia 07:14, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I read the talk page. It's all good ;) Scepia 07:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zelda: TP

Just putting the semi-protection tag doesn't protect a page. Only an Admin can actually protect the page, you can always request protection though. TJ Spyke 04:41, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

How can I do that, or could you? Cheers. JackSparrow Ninja 04:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Here you go, request it here: Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. TJ Spyke 05:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Raymanravingrabbidswiibox.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Raymanravingrabbidswiibox.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 12:18, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Tloztp twilightking.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Tloztp twilightking.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — TKD::Talk 20:48, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3RR

Hey Jack,

Just wanted to let you know that you're in violation of the three-revert rule at List of computer and video games considered the worst ever, having reverted multiple editors in good faith at least 5 times in the last 24 hours. Please discuss the issue with them on the talk page rather than engage in an edit war. Please be aware that further reversions may result in a temporary block, as this type of editing is considered disruptive and counter to the whole idea of consensus-building. Thanks. — TKD::Talk 20:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule at List of computer and video games considered the worst ever. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. The block is for 24 hours. Note that these are 4 clear reverts: [1], [2], [3], [4]; but there were also some partial reverts in this time period as well. Reverting constantly is not going to convince anyone, and is disruptive. Please discuss the issue on the talk page when the block expires. — TKD::Talk 00:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Please discuss the issue with them on the talk page rather than engage in an edit war.
If you would look at the situation, you would see that said users are the ones that have started an edit war, ignoring any discussion that over time has been made by the users that look after the article.
The edits have not been in good faith. Well referenced parts have been removed, while others have been removed where a simple tag would have fullfilled. The edits that were made were done very carelessly and with no showing of good faith howsoever. Good faith would have been discussing it, as has been proposed many times by me. Yet these users believe, for some reason, they are important enough to have a veto that overrules anything else.
This whole ordeal is caused because all users that have never been involved in the article, and have no background information whatsoever, have been dragged into this by one user that for some reason feels wronged about a well-referenced addition. I hope when overlooking the situation, you will see past a 3RR, which is nothing more then a try to stop the vandalism that this article is enduring, and unblock me. Cheers. JackSparrow Ninja 00:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, it appears that the dispute is over referencing standards for inclusion in the list, and what may have been acceptable in the past is being questioned by multiple editors. Remember, consensus can change and that there is no ownership of an article outside of the sense for copyright purposes. Bringing in third (and fourth and fifth, etc.) opinions is fine; it's what WP:RFC does. That said, it looks like everyone is editing in good faith; it's a matter of how to define the standards for inclusion in the list that appears to be problematic. I'd advise you to be careful not to label their edits as vandalism, especially given concerns over verifiability and defamation; WP:VAND's definition is stricter than that. This isn't about vandalism; it's a content dispute.
I'll unblock if you promise to stop edit warring and work with the others to try to come to a consensus as to what the standards should be for "the worst ever". — TKD::Talk 00:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
I guess a different point of view is possible.
Promise though. Thanks for understanding. JackSparrow Ninja 01:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
I've unblocked. Happy editing. — TKD::Talk 01:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Vandalism"

Please do not tag good faith edits by other users as vandalism. Wikipedia:No original research is an official policy on Wikipedia - please have a good read through it. Remember too that this is an encyclopaedia and articles should be written in an encyclopaedic-tone and have citations. Thanks/wangi 17:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Remember you were unblocked above because you indicated that you would stop doing these reverts... /wangi 17:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

This was one -of many- case of vandalism by AMIB. He has removed many well referenced parts, and removing the game that is considered the worst ever by everyone -take a look at the article page, it's overrun with references to it- is vandalism. That entry is no OR, it is well referenced and supported by everyone. JackSparrow Ninja 17:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:TheLegendOfZeldaTwilightPrincessGraphicscomparison.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:TheLegendOfZeldaTwilightPrincessGraphicscomparison.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 18:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)