User talk:Damieng

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Resident Evil 4

It was in their latest 10K (or at least the transcript of the investor call), where they mentioned they're working on the PS2 version. My little Bloomberg newsreader doesn't keep Japanese companies transcripts, but a little google news search should show you the way. GameSpot summarized it as follows:

"Capcom announced today that the long-awaited follow-up to its popular survival horror franchise, originally planned to appear only on the GameCube console, is also headed to Sony's PlayStation2.

The PS2 version of Resident Evil 4 is currently slated to be released at the end of 2005 in Japan, the US, and Europe. The GameCube version is still scheduled for a January 2005 release in the US and Japan, followed by a spring release in Europe.

In a statement released today, Capcom said that the decision to make Resident Evil 4 go cross-platform was based on requests from fans worldwide, market considerations, and shareholder requests. The statement made mention of the fact that each version of the game will be developed to take advantage of the strengths of the respective platform."

If you'd like to read an explanation of why they'd announce this BEFORE the GCN release (thereby possibly shooting themselves in the foot), go here . Bye! Terrapin 22:11, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thats great news! (I don't have a GameCube anyway) DamienG 00:43, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)
Hello, Damien. Since you are always fixing things at the Resident Evil article, I thought I could warn you about something that's been happening. It seems like some people are willing to take away the info that says Resident Evil 4 will be released for the PlayStation 2 in 2005. It happened three times already, from what I could see. Two of them were by the same user. I already warned him, but perhaps you should keep your eyes peeled about this. The info is official, as you know. It already has a page at GameSpot.
Anyway, one more thing. It's not a very good idea to remove some discussions from an article's talk page. It kinda makes people wonder about what went there before, so it's important to keep it there. It might be better to move them to an archive, though, but I still think it's better not to delete that info.
Thanks for your attention. See you around.--Kaonashi 19:41, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Regarding your message, don't worry. I'll take care of the situation if someone decides to do that again in the article. And no, I don't think what you said there in the talk page was bad or harsh. In the end, it's the truth anyway. See you in a while, then.--Kaonashi 02:46, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Felis sapiens

Since you are the latest registered user to edit Felis sapiens, I hope you might be willing to check a suspicious edit that I reverted once. It was replaced and frankly I don't know the subject matter well enough to know if it is legit. Would you be willing to verify? Thank you. SWAdair | Talk 05:09, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  • Thank you for confirming my suspicions. I've reverted again. SWAdair | Talk 09:03, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] BeOS

At least thats a lot more beleivable than the last person who claimed to developed bits of BeOS on here :-)

I use the Irish keymap from Haiku anyway, to get my weird Ireland-specific backtick action going on. Nice to know theres another developer, even if you may have lapsed to the other side or the Dark Side Kiand 21:43, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Category:UK Wikipedians

Hi, just to let you know that the list of UK participants at the UK notice board was getting rather long, so I have replaced it with the above category which I have added to your user page. -- Francs2000 | Talk 30 June 2005 19:10 (UTC)

[edit] Crown copyright

Whilst crown copyright may allow us, on this site, to reproduce the material without getting into trouble, it is not compatible with the GFDL, and is therefore unsuitable to be included as content in an article (see footer: "All contributions to any page on Wikipedia are released under the GNU Free Documentation License"). ed g2s • talk

I did read that, and if you read further:
"What is meant by waiver?
8. Waiver means that although copyright is asserted, the Government wishes to encourage the widespread use of the Material. Users are permitted to copy or publish the Material in any medium without having to seek formal permission or to pay a fee. We do, however, ask that users ensure that:
  • the Material is reproduced accurately and not in a way that could confuse or mislead others;
  • that the Material is correctly acknowledged (see paragraph 10);
  • the Royal Arms are removed when the Material is being republished."
So still, not GFDL compatible. ed g2s • talk 8 July 2005 14:28 (UTC)

[edit] Date links

Since you have taken an interest in links. Please be kind enough to vote for my new bot application to reduce overlinking of dates where they are not part of date preferences. bobblewik 20:31, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Doing something about the ridiculous date autoformatting/linking mess

Dear Damieng—you may be interested in putting your name to, or at least commenting on this new push to get the developers to create a parallel syntax that separates autoformatting and linking functions. IMV, it would go a long way towards fixing the untidy blueing of trivial chronological items, and would probably calm the nastiness between the anti- and pro-linking factions in the project. The proposal is to retain the existing function, to reduce the risk of objection from pro-linkers.Tony 15:06, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Plus 3 screenshot

Largely because the screenshot is not free, but the images of the hardware (none of which I added to the article, I should point out) are. WP:NFCC criterion 8 requires that all non-free media are used "only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic". The screenshot did not, so I removed it. --Pak21 13:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crown dependency place infobox

Hello, I've noticed you're a Wikipedian in or from the Channel Islands. There is a discussion found here regarding the possible use of the Template:Infobox UK place on settlement articles relating to the three Crown dependancies of the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey.

It's a very strong infobox with alot of automation, flexibility and localised mapping, (examples are found at Kirkwall or Chew Valley) and though is entitled with "UK", wouldn't formally display the United Kingdom in any article. I'd welcome you to discuss if this is a good idea for these island's towns and villages. Hope to hear from you, Jza84 23:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SweetHomeInGame1.png

Thanks for uploading Image:SweetHomeInGame1.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:39, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SweetHomeMansion.png

Thanks for uploading Image:SweetHomeMansion.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:40, 15 January 2008 (UTC)