User talk:DrSturm

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do not discuss changes to articles with me here; take it to the article talk page. This is a community project, the community should have a part in the decision, or at least be given the chance. DrSturm 10:45, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

1 License tagging for Image:YUUSABOX.jpg
2 Orphaned fair use image (Image:Yggdrabox.gif)
3 Re:Riviera
4 Regarding Yggdra Union - Bugs and Errors section
5 Ahem.
6 Three revert rule on Luminous Arc
7 Eternal Sonata
8 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:YUCardSShot.PNG
9 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:YUPACPCover.jpg
10 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:VGStingLogo.gif
11 Image copyright problem with Image:Bathscenecomparison.png

[edit] License tagging for Image:YUUSABOX.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:YUUSABOX.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 04:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Yggdrabox.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Yggdrabox.gif. 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. MECU≈talk 22:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Riviera

Your recent edit disturbs me... ok, so the Diviners arent strictly part of gameplay, but then where do u suggect we put them? Not to mention that their names are derived from these neat legends and the fact that they are made of orihalcon. That makes them interesting and supports the point made earlier that RTPL draws from Norse and Roman mythology. Lets put our heads together and try to rewrite the article, ok? --WoodElf 06:04, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Your claims of my vandalism is in direct conflict with WP:AGF. Maybe you dont realise it, but you are not the only fan of Riviera. I restate my offer to work together to make Riviera a better article. --WoodElf 05:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Yggdra Union - Bugs and Errors section

I agree with the person who took out the section. Frankly, the section has too much hyperbole to meet Wiki's standards on neutrality. For example, while I have not played the Japanese version, I don't think the term "laden with glitches" is accurate. From reading the Lacrima Castle thread, there seem to be a relatively small amount of bugs, especially compared to what most games come away with, and most of these problems are simple neglectable graphic errors. Even the larger glitches in question are on the obscure side and would not be seen often by the common player. This hardly seems "laden". And these bugs were found "upsetting" how and to whom, exactly?

However, the most grievous offense seems to be the section about the translation. Stating that it has "poor editing" and that "many typos and grammatical errors can be found in the script" is far too strongly-worded. Aside from the first two examples you stated, and one more on the thread post (the Bloody Rapier is a graphic issue, not a text. The morale up icon should've been a morale down), there seem to be no other issues with it. The way you've written the paragraph makes it appear that the game has a much worse translation than it actually does. In fact, no professional reviews I've found have made any mention of noticing typos or grammatical errors. The review at RPGamer.com even specifically states that the translation contains "no discernable spelling or grammar errors." Personally, I think that your implication that these rare spelling mistakes are a notable complaint of the game is in fact a huge discredit to Atlus's translation effort, which is actually quite well-done.

While there's certainly nothing wrong with analyzing a game in-depth, you must realize that nitpicking on a handful of issues does not constitute as common complaints or wide-spread problems, and the Wiki article should not imply such.

Firstly, the glitches are pretty large, and span the entire game. Game locking, game altering, etc, the only ones listed there are those that are replicable, but many more have been reported, plenty that I've seen with my own eyes. Yes, there are mere graphics glitches, but do you think people are not upset when such a pretty game gets so messed up? And you're right. No professional reviewer has mentioned it. No professional reviewer usually spends more than a quick, cursory, single playthrough with any game, either, and RPGamer had that review up several months before the USA release, so it is always possible they got, perhaps, an earlier or even possibly corrected version. And, no, the item effect is not a graphics issue unless every typo in the game is a graphics issue; you don't excuse it as not the editor's responsibility unless it's not something the editor is supposed to look at (ie, not text). I can go through and scrutinize the script for more errors if you wish (hell, I listed only the major ones, I can think of several others off the top of my head, including the description of the first item you get), and, as I said, if all that everyone thinks is required is a rewrite, I'm fine with that. If you want me to find people complaining about the localization, the glitches, etc, I can do that, as well. DrSturm 14:51, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ahem.

You see, there's nothing that suggests for us to use the American date set-up. Since it began with the 8 February set-up, The American date should follow that. The MOS says that "when in doubt, use the earliest major contributor." If you want to take consistency to an extreme, then logically, we could not give the Japanese name, because the article would have to be "consistently English". Which is patently untrue. So, no, at no point is the article required to be consistent even if it goes against logic. Consistency in writing, NOT the set-up. Don't use color and colour in the same article. And on top of that, nothing suggests that consistency in dates is necessary. It is detrimental to an article to use the American date set-up for PAL dates, because PAL dates are far more for PAL readers than American readers, and logically, it is in their best interests to see it in the way that's normal for them. There is no one date set-up between the American one and the PAL one that's less used in Japan (at least that can be shown). The MoS states that when in doubt of what to do, look at the earliest major contributor. The earliest major contributor used the PAL date set-up, and since that is an accepted set-up in Japan, it should be the one used, because you cannot show that one date set-up is better than the other for Japan.

And if you report me for vandalism, you'll probably just get mocked and have the "case dismissed". - A Link to the Past (talk) 07:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I thought I'd use this section, since it's already referring to the Luminous Arc article.

You're currently in violation of 3RR. Please refrain from further edit-warring. Neither of you has discussed the subject at all on the article's talk page.

Arguing via edit summaries will not resolve a dispute. Bladestorm 15:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Three revert rule on Luminous Arc

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule on 24 hours. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. past ops) 15:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

- A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 15:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you have any objection to using yyyy-mm-dd format on the article? --tjstrf talk 19:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Eternal Sonata

Hi, I know normally we should keep things relating to the article itself on the discussion page, but I risk breaking NDA agreements by stating why I know certain things about this game. Beats weapon is both a gun AND a hammer. I know this because I work for Namco and I have a lot of experience with this game. It was something we questioned too, but from the developers themselves, we were told it was a "gunhammer". Just thought I'd be friendly and let you know.

... Yeah, anyways, I never said Beat's weapon wasn't a hammer. If you checked the changes, you'd know I was talking about Chopin's weapon.

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:YUCardSShot.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:YUCardSShot.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) 20:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:YUPACPCover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:YUPACPCover.jpg. 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.

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:VGStingLogo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:VGStingLogo.gif. 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.

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Bathscenecomparison.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Bathscenecomparison.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:59, 15 May 2008 (UTC)