User talk:JQF/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Explain to me please how five books and ONE movie makes a franchise? While there have been other formats, but through the debates I've had here, most fans only know of the books, and now the movie, and only about the plays, radio and tv series through the secondary literature. Franchise also implies to me of a corporation using a single story/idea and making multiple shows/movies/etc out of that idea, when nearly every edition of H2G2 was done by one man. --JohnDBuell | Talk 02:58, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- Ok, in the UK, where H2G2 originated, they first had the radio plays. These are repeated every so often on BBC and the like, and are one of the most, if not the most, know version in the UK. The first books were based on the radio plays. Further books were then released. A short TV series was made, which also appears every so often on BBC and the like. More books (and a lot of merchandise) were released. Then the movie, and finally more radio plays based on the last of the books. Not to mention all the spin-off stuff. So if that is not definable as a franchise, nothing is. It's all in the article. And just because it was all done by one man (and it wasn't), doesn't mean it can't be a franchise. --JQF | Talk 03:30, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
Copyright violation
Hi! Your original contributions are appreciated, but please don't cut and paste info from sites like tv.com as this is a violation of copyright law. Thanks! - Lucky 6.9 02:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
You can restore the pages if you wish and change the text to your own words, but anything with copyrighted material in it with no prior history is a speedy deletion candidate. - Lucky 6.9 02:48, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, if you've used anything directly from a site like nbc.com, those are copyvios. No can do. :) - Lucky 6.9 02:49, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Copyright images
Sorry, we can't use copyright images like Image:GuanlongWucaii.jpg. Gdr 15:50, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- You need to demonstrate that it has a license that we can use. Gdr 15:59, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
According to Nature [1], the picture is © Zhongda Zhang/IVPP (IVPP is the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in China). What evidence do you have that we have permission to use it? Gdr 16:16, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- As I said, how do you know? Gdr 16:26, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
You know that CNN think it's OK to use it. But that doesn't mean that it's in the public domain. It's very likely that the press release is copyrighted and comes with conditions on use and distributions. These conditions may allow CNN to use the image but not us. If you can point to the original press release (perhaps on the IVPP website?) we can see what it says.
You should read this mail thread and maybe contribute your expertise to Talk:News release. Gdr 16:45, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
River Tam
I tend to disagree with your change in River's occupation. First of all, she's a pilot for, what, five minutes of the movie? Compared to about 16 hours of being a fugitive with no on-board job. But maybe more importantly, it's a pretty big spoiler for those who haven't seen the movie. If a sequel comes out, it might make sense to change it, but for 99.9% of the series, Wash is the pilot. Your thoughts? Kafziel 22:10, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- I just though I'd kept it current. If you want to change it back, by all means, go ahead. JQF 23:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for experimenting with the page Jack Harkness on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. — 
nathanrdotcom (T • C • W) 01:48, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Ghostbusters III
I have nominated your article Ghostbusters III for deletion, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghostbusters III. Wkdewey 04:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Tingle RPG
Actually, I believe that the name is correct; [2]
- Forums are not reliable sources. JQF 17:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, those forums and their silly fake scans and the fact that GAF is where IGN, GS, etc. get their sales information for North America. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Credible sources get their sales info from forums? I though they got them from the companies that sold the products. I would have never guessed. JQF 18:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Wow, man. Cut the sarcasm and listen to this guy's ideas. --Chris Griswold 16:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Will you stop referring to it as if I'm saying all forums are more reliable? I'm pointing out the fact that multiple people at GAF sign up for NPD's sales report (such as two users who go by the name crazy buttocks on a train and bunkum) - and IGN/GS don't. They don't get the sales information from the companies unless the companies make a press release, it is NPD's job, and it requires a great sum of money for a yearly subscription, and IGN/GS do not sign up for numbers, only getting the top 25 in $$$ and in units sold.
- Credible sources get their sales info from forums? I though they got them from the companies that sold the products. I would have never guessed. JQF 18:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, those forums and their silly fake scans and the fact that GAF is where IGN, GS, etc. get their sales information for North America. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Additionally, we're getting off topic. Did you not notice a link and a scan containing images from the game? - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:50, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- I saw something, but it didn't actually confirm anything put in the article, plus the none of the new info has any citation. Not even that link you offered was put it. I'm pretty sure it's a hoax, or at least misinformation, but I'm not going to bother getting into a rv war. All I did last time was put a "No sources" tag on it. If it is true, then a credible source should come up in the next day or two. JQF 18:57, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, yes, I forgot that if it's not from IGN or GameSpot, it must be a hoax. Who cares that jeux-france is a reputable source, that news on GAF is more often real than fake, that you're implying that IGN knows everything. They're so knowledgable that they didn't report on the scans of Diamond/Pearl! So do we assume that there are no screenshots released because IGN didn't say they were real? - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:13, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Additionally, you're assuming bad faith for this source in that someone typed an entire article in Japanese, put it on this scan, made every single image (likely spending a GREAT deal of time to make every individual screenshot), doing it in the same style that the first released screenshot did, and having it submitted to Jeux-France right after Nintendo confirmed that it was still in development and coming in 2006. If magazine scans are not reliable, CoroCoro, which has been announcing Pokémon games since Red/Blue. IGN and GS are not all-knowing, all-seeing omnipotent beings, and neither even reported on the CoroCoro scans. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, yes, I forgot that if it's not from IGN or GameSpot, it must be a hoax. Who cares that jeux-france is a reputable source, that news on GAF is more often real than fake, that you're implying that IGN knows everything. They're so knowledgable that they didn't report on the scans of Diamond/Pearl! So do we assume that there are no screenshots released because IGN didn't say they were real? - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:13, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- I saw something, but it didn't actually confirm anything put in the article, plus the none of the new info has any citation. Not even that link you offered was put it. I'm pretty sure it's a hoax, or at least misinformation, but I'm not going to bother getting into a rv war. All I did last time was put a "No sources" tag on it. If it is true, then a credible source should come up in the next day or two. JQF 18:57, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Additionally, we're getting off topic. Did you not notice a link and a scan containing images from the game? - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:50, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
Cleanup article
Hello! I'm new to Wikipedia and wanted to help on an article you recently tagged as needing cleanup. It's this article: Jayne Cobb What things jumped out at you as needing work? I can then try and tackle those, thanks! -plange 00:51, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Geek Fu Action Grip
I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Geek Fu Action Grip, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Importance). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:Geek Fu Action Grip. If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJK 15:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Young Avengers/Runaways
Did you merge the four covers together yourself, or is that an image that Marvel released? (this isn't a complaint or anything; I think it looks great. I'm just curious, as the only image I've seen Marvel release was smaller)--DrBat 23:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- The Image:CWYARCovers.jpg image? I got it from IGN, when they used it in one of there article. They get some premium stuff, although I don't know if they edited it or got it from Marvel. JQF 23:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
FLCL
As a userbox fan of FLCL, would you be willing to vote for its nomination at Wikipedia's Article Improvement Drive? If elected, it will be the subject of a week-long overhaul, in an attempt to pass in to Featured Article status! Thanks, Litefantastic 16:23, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- No problem. FLCL could defiently be a FA. Thanks for pointing it out to me, as I wouldn't have known about it otherwise. JQF 17:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
wierd template?
In your edit to PvP, you added the following:
{{-}}
I was just wondering what it does? --DakAD 15:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thiat template "clears" both margins. It's used with pics and other templates to ensure that text is wraped to either create space or cram text where it shouldn't go. For example, I added it to PvP article because the character bit of Francis was crammed over to the side under the pic of him and Brent, creating a white space. By adding it, Francis' describtion not cevers the full page.
- Oh, and for futer ref, if you type Template:[template name] into the search box, you can see the template's page, and their is usually some info their to explain it's functions. For this template you would go to Template:-. JQF 20:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
ah, i see... or rather i dont, as it seems the same with and without it to me (FF, XP, 800*600). Cheers for the answre, and the template tip :-) --DakAD 04:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
The Alpha Flight members navbox you started... and I altered
Hey I just got this from ChrisGriwold, who I also seem to clash with. I'm stubborn... he's stubborn... ah well.
- "These navbox templates you've been adding are under discussion at the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Comics#These_Infoboxes talk page. Please stop creating and adding these while we discuss them. Currently, the discussion appears to be going against their inclusion in articles, so you may want to join the discussion to present your opinion. Good luck.--Chris Griswold (☎☓) 01:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC)"
This includes your Alpha Flight one you created. So dude, I guess if we want them kept we better start defending them otherwise they may do their little lets delete it and that would [CENSORED] me off!.
Sweet
- Thanks for the info. JQF 21:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Marvel Ultimate Alliance
Hey JQF, there's a poll regarding playable characters on the Ultimate Alliance page. You've contributed to this page before so I thought you might want to participate. CPitt76 02:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- Nice work on reformatting the characters table. A lot better than the previous version. CPitt76 02:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- No problem, glad to help out. JQF 11:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Why do you keep putting Beast, Shadowcat and Emma Frost down as in the game? There is far more argument that Hulk is in that cinematic than any of those three. Do you have a source to citate other than that cinematic, or are you just determined to take a vendetta out against Hulk?GrantRS 19:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- No I haven't seen it, it's in the VIP section of the website. Are you sure you aren't thinking of the trailer for the new Marvel MMORPG, cause the Hulk is certainly featured in that. JQF 20:44, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm sure. People in the VIP section of the site have created stills of the video called "The Ink To Game Process", in it Cyclops and Colossus are clearly seen being beaten by Dr. Doom, this is the only source we have as far as I'm aware of Colossus being in the game, yet he got NPC status on the table from it. There are shots where bodies are seen on the floor, the Hulk is the biggest of these, and therefore easily identifiable. Gambit is in the foreground, with cards lying near his hand, this is all we can really confirm from this clip. There are bodies in the distance that people have speculated may be Shadowcat and Emma Frost, there is a blur even further in the distance, which people are debating over: some believe it to be Beast, others believe it to merely be rubble. Thankyou for your time.GrantRS 14:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- Once again, you've reverted something without checking whether it is true. Why have you taken away the snippet I added to say Storm is confirmed playable to VIPs? Was it badly worded? Do you disagree with sharing information from the VIP site that isn't revealed to the public? If either of those were your reason for deleting the information, then fine, I accept that point of view, but it seems very to me that you are constantly reverting things on this page without actually checking them, if this is the case, when will it stop? I know you are constantly having to repair vandalism to the page, and that can tempt you into not bothering to check facts, but really you shouldn't bother reverting the page if you can't be bothered to check the facts! You say yourself that you hate it when people "whitewash" your changes, well what you're doing here is exactly that!GrantRS 15:30, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry. I did not see your edit. I saw a large number of vandalism edits, and your edit was between them, and reverted the lot. I should have checked each edit more carefully. I've just been frustrated over the number of vandalism edits I've had to revert. However, I have recently gotten the page semi-protected, so the vandalism should be reduced, and this kind of thing shouldn't happen again. JQF 17:38, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Once again, you've reverted something without checking whether it is true. Why have you taken away the snippet I added to say Storm is confirmed playable to VIPs? Was it badly worded? Do you disagree with sharing information from the VIP site that isn't revealed to the public? If either of those were your reason for deleting the information, then fine, I accept that point of view, but it seems very to me that you are constantly reverting things on this page without actually checking them, if this is the case, when will it stop? I know you are constantly having to repair vandalism to the page, and that can tempt you into not bothering to check facts, but really you shouldn't bother reverting the page if you can't be bothered to check the facts! You say yourself that you hate it when people "whitewash" your changes, well what you're doing here is exactly that!GrantRS 15:30, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm sure. People in the VIP section of the site have created stills of the video called "The Ink To Game Process", in it Cyclops and Colossus are clearly seen being beaten by Dr. Doom, this is the only source we have as far as I'm aware of Colossus being in the game, yet he got NPC status on the table from it. There are shots where bodies are seen on the floor, the Hulk is the biggest of these, and therefore easily identifiable. Gambit is in the foreground, with cards lying near his hand, this is all we can really confirm from this clip. There are bodies in the distance that people have speculated may be Shadowcat and Emma Frost, there is a blur even further in the distance, which people are debating over: some believe it to be Beast, others believe it to merely be rubble. Thankyou for your time.GrantRS 14:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- No I haven't seen it, it's in the VIP section of the website. Are you sure you aren't thinking of the trailer for the new Marvel MMORPG, cause the Hulk is certainly featured in that. JQF 20:44, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Why do you keep putting Beast, Shadowcat and Emma Frost down as in the game? There is far more argument that Hulk is in that cinematic than any of those three. Do you have a source to citate other than that cinematic, or are you just determined to take a vendetta out against Hulk?GrantRS 19:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- No problem, glad to help out. JQF 11:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
At least we tried...
Hey, Well that was a waste of my life I'm never getting back but I suppose these things do happen... even if you wanna tear other other dictatorial S.O.B's a new one.
- Yeah, but just keep an eye out for anybody asking where they went. Tell them what happen, and if enough people want them back, then they could come back. That is the nature of wikipedia. Of course, if what we had in mind bleeds over into the new navboxes being created, that wouldn't be a bad thing. JQF 17:59, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Will do. Lucky for us I saved all of them to harddisk. Mine. Yours. The others. Though I think I missed the Serpant Society. Have a good one. :) Originalsinner 19:04, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- You too. JQF 19:16, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Oh I just noticed something too. They deleted the navboxes and haven't done the clean-up. All these broken template links are at the bottom of the pages which means where the A-List will get cleaned-up, I'm sure it will be a while before the rest get cleaned up and I'm not helping with the clean up. We have every right to be pissy. :) Originalsinner 19:22, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Also (and it pissed me off when i logged on and the templates were deleted. Sometimes it sucks being in the "tomorrow" timezone) since the discussion was very active why were the navboxes still deleted?
- I don't know. Did the TfD hit the end date? I'm surprised they didn't just use a bot to clean it all up. It's all a mess. JQF 19:43, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Also (and it pissed me off when i logged on and the templates were deleted. Sometimes it sucks being in the "tomorrow" timezone) since the discussion was very active why were the navboxes still deleted?
- I guess the TfD must have hit it's end date. A bot hasn't been used yet. But if that's the case it's taking its sweet time. Hey, if you need back-up again just holla. For now, I'm just gonna concentrate on the music project but I will keep an eye out for "whatever happened to..." from other contribs. Good luck with the rest and the best dude. Originalsinner 19:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- You too. JQF 20:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Will do. Lucky for us I saved all of them to harddisk. Mine. Yours. The others. Though I think I missed the Serpant Society. Have a good one. :) Originalsinner 19:04, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Orphaned fair use image (Image:JeffSmithLastBone.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:JeffSmithLastBone.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.
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) 16:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your help
Thank you for help in the Single-grain experiment article. It was DYK on October 12. I greatly appreciated it. Chris 00:56, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- No problem. Just doning my part to help. JQF 01:00, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
You helped choose Pluto as this week's WP:AID winner
Davodd 20:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
You helped choose Mark Twain as this week's WP:AID winner
→AzaToth 00:19, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
List of Firefly episodes
Spoilers are appropriate in an encyclopedia. The manual of style/guidline at Wikipedia:Spoiler warning says what is not acceptable is to "Deleting relevant, neutral and verifiable information about a narrative work from Wikipedia "because it's a spoiler" instead of properly applying spoiler templates." List of Buffy the Vampire Slayer episodes is being rewritten right now because someone wanted to make it a featured list and it's main problem is it doesn't have spoilers, see here. - Peregrinefisher 18:07, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Well, issue I have with the summaries was that they reveled the end of the episode, which I don't think readers want. Yes, some spoliers are needed inorder to properly summerize, but revealing the end goes to far in my opinion. If you look at the article I pointed out, List of South Park episodes, which is a featured article, you'll see that they don't reveal the ending. JQF 18:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
3RR
You've been reported for violation of the three revert rule of {{Wario series}} at WP:AN/3RR. Combination 18:48, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- You don't don't look at differences in pages, do you? JQF 18:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Point
Please stop changing pages to make a point see WP:POINT Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 15:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- Could you please clarify which pages you are talking about? JQF 15:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
[3] and Most of your template edits today. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 15:34, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- The only edits I've done so far today was removing breaks from game navboxes, because according to the new navbox rules, they aren't suppose to be sectioned at all, and that's what the breaks were doing. JQF 15:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
