Talk:Dragon Wing (ship)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 2007-02-21. The result of the discussion was Merge to Teirm. |
[edit] Uncategorised Stub Category
For the second time I have now removed the separate [[Category:Stubs]] at the bottom of this article - this page has been sorted into a specific stub category by the use of a stub template, {{fictional-stub}}. This means that the article is automatically categorised as a stub pertaining to a fictional object, but is not included in the page of uncategorised stubs. See WP:WSS for more info. Jeodesic 22:05, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- the TALK PAGE should be used for ANNY contested additionas and removals from the article. after i mistakendly put the stub cate back you should have come over here and ust told me. Smith Jones 00:43, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Please remember in the future that talk pages are a good thing, Smith Jones, especially for major changes. Reading change logs is also a good thing. You could have taken the initiative here yourself by asking "Hey, why are you removing that category again?" if you wanted to contest it. Jeodesic in fact specified in his change why he did it: "Remove category: stubs, this is already in a stub category." If you had a question about his reason for change, you could have asked it yourself instead of firing off about it with your "WHAT is the matter with you!?!?! if you have a reason for these changes PLEASE mention it in the talk page okya!?" He didn't need to mention it on the talk page since he'd already mentioned it on the change log. Jeodesic acted appropriately.
-
- Also please consider: You overwrote an entire article without discussing it on the related talk page. I created this (ship) article to handle the information you slapped onto the original Dragon Wing page without discussing it, hence why I categorized that as "vandalism." If you aren't going to utilize talk pages yourself, you shouldn't insist that others do it.
-
- I hope that sums things up. So, everyone settle down and get back to making wikis a happy place. -- Immora 07:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Inaccurate categories
I removed several categories that are inaccurate. This doesn't belong in the activist, dragon, or terrorist categories because it's a fictional boat. But having not read the books, for all I know it could be a boat that transforms into a dragon. Unless that's the case, though, it doesn't belong in the dragon category. This also doesn't belong in the Wikipedian WikiGnomes category because that is for wikignome users, not articles worked on by wikignomes. Right now, there isn't a fictional boat category or I'd put it there rather than boats to parallel the fictional submarines category. -- Immora 05:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- no the Dragon Wing (ship) is use by a activism group, and it is designed to look like dragon. maybe i could make a fictoonal boats or water vehicles category because i can think of lots of baots that can go there. Smith Jones 17:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- The activist category is for real-life activists, though, and the dragons category is for fictional/mythological dragons, not things designed to look like dragons. There really should be a fictional boats category, though! There's Category:Fictional_submarines (like the Nautilus, Seaquest, etc.) so it'd make sense to add a fictional boats category. I don't know what the category projects are looking at doing, but that'd be the right category over Boats once it exists. :) -- Immora 18:46, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- oh so dos that mean tat boats and weapons USED by activistss can't go to fctional activist section? do wyou know if were allowedf to create a new categroy? Smith Jones 19:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- "Activists are people engaged in activism." -- Category:Activists
- The tools of activists still are not activists because they aren't people, so I don't think they'd belong in Category:Fictional_activists either. The categories are for people/characters and organizations. I'm not familiar with the category creation policies so I can't say if the Fictional boats idea is all right. I think it might be welcomed by fictional article people, but maybe look around for some other fictional boat-related articles to see if there's a need for a category?
- Edited to add: here's something to check out: List of fictional ships. Also found there's already a Category:Fictional ships that would suit, so we ought to recategorize this from Boats to Fictional ships. -- Immora 20:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- thanks for adding the category fictional ships i also gave inheritance its owny section on the list of fictional ships thing and put the dragonwing on that as well. Smith Jones 21:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] More edits
i just expanded the catregory for the ships so i will remove nonsense stub tag. Smith Jones 02:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Article is looking better, and I disagreed with that tag as well. The user who put it up is a deletionist, which is a Wiki philosophy I don't agree with! However, the article still needs to be high-quality, so it shouldn't include unsourced fan speculation and irrelevent things like lists of other ships (those are found on other articles). Some of the short descriptions I removed were redundancies, as well as things that I didn't understand so I wasn't sure how to edit them. There was a teacher named Oromis in a land called Oromis? I haven't read the books, so I don't know if he shared the name with the land; looked funny to me! Correct that if Oromis is from Oromis, though; the Oromis article didn't mention a land so I didn't see how it worked.
- Also, please use a spellchecker! It'll keep the article quality up so people won't come along thinking it should be deleted when it's still new. -- Immora 03:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- my mistake is ent that oreomis was from the land of oromis but that is not incorrect. it should be that sayng Oromis from the land of land of Ellemsere in Christopher paolini's epic fantasy trilog y that INheritnace Trilogy. apologising also again for the redunances and i will tr y by best to buy a good splelchecker for internet posts. Smith Jones 00:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- How old are you Smith Jones? NeoFreak 00:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
-
