User talk:Just64helpin/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] problem!

Hi there! I did some further expansion on the Homework page. But after saving the page, I don't know what happened, but the page became screwed up, as in one of the sections I put in didn't show up. Can you help me straighten it out without reverting. Sorry about the error.(SUDUSER)₈₅ 07:46, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi there! I just wanted to say thanks for fixing the problem. Anyways I'm thinking we should work on the Homework article to promote to FA. I would appreciate your opinion on this topic. Have a look over here to look at music-related Featured Articles. Anyway its not required for it to be on the Main Page. Thanks! (SUDUSER)₈₅ 03:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Electroma edit

You reverted my extensive and time consuming edit for the plot summary of Electroma, without any explanation... why? :( 84.217.137.13 07:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

The first part of your reply doesn't make sense to me. What does it matter if what I described was the final cut or not? The current plot section in the article is most likely a description of the same cut that I saw anyway! If it will be changed in later releases, then change the article, simple as that! I can take the "no original research" argument though, and surely my conclusions about what the naked female crotch is supposed to symbolise can be classified as original research. But apart from that; is watching a movie and describing what happens considered too much of "original research" for wikipedia? That's just silly to me. Do we really need to describe how someone else has described it? Last but not least, your pondering regarding whether I saw a legal copy or not is completely out of place. Whether I saw it at a film festival or if I downloaded it or whatever hardly affects the subject in question, namely the actual wikipedia article. I'm going to change the article back to what I had written previously; unless you can provide better reasoning for why it shouldn't be there at all, please just edit what I write and don't remove it completely. Thank you. 84.217.137.13 17:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: "de" Homem-Christo

It just seems weird to start the last name with "of." On his article, I changed the defaultsort (how the article shows up in categories) to "Homem-Christo, Guy-Manuel de" which looks like it makes the most sense. I think it would be better to describe Guy-Manuel as just "Homem-Christo" instead of "de Homem-Christo" when just mentioning his last name. Douglasr007 18:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: The Wii

Blakegripling_ph: Thanks for the unauthorized edit, Just; I'm not really mad at what you've done, it's just that at least someone has bothered to edit my user page... God Bless and Happy Wiki-ing... = )

[edit] The Prime Time of Your Life

I'm just wondering, to categorize the song, is the "The" essential?. Plz reply on my talk! Thanks! (SUDUSER)₈₅ 05:05, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wii technical problems -> Wii Remote#Reception

Hi! Thanks for taking the time to suggest what info was worth merging for the Wii technical problems article. I was a bit worried that we'd end up with a "merge" vote and yet nothing to merge! Do you think this is a merge that you could take a crack at? I'd be happy to perform the merge myself if you aren't interested, but I'd rather have someone who sees value in the information doing the work.

My personal feeling is that the current text is cherry picking that puts a strong negative spin on the reception of the remote. So the changes I would make to the work might not contain much of the original work. Thus the request for someone else to handle the merge. Please let me know if you're available or not. Thanks! Jbanes 15:59, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response! Let me know if you feel you need any assistance, and I'll provide whatever help I can. Jbanes 16:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks like a good start. You may find this recent article on Red Steel to be something that can be incorporated as a more positive review. Specifically, "the speed and precision of aiming and shooting offered by the Wiimote proves to be one of the game's strong points. Taking down swathes of enemies with nothing more than a twitch of the wrist proves immensely satisfying and, more importantly, incredibly involving." Jbanes 19:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

BTW, since you have the text sandboxed now, mind if I submit the article for a final evaluation by admins? Jbanes 20:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

It's a start. Thanks for taking the time to do this! :-) Jbanes 20:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WFNY

When I added the first description of what WFNY was airing it was short, as I listened longer they did more things, so I added more. Then it just went nuts:) Thanks for adding a shortened version. Take Care....NeutralHomer ^T:C 16:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Daft Punk discography

Would you mind explaining why you reverted my change to this article? Please be aware that our Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria and our image use policy do not allow us to use copyrighted images in lists or galleries such as this one. (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Then I will "ditto" you my response to that other user: Please refer to Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria #8, which specifically states that fair-use images may not be used in lists or galleries. Additionally, Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images outlines that album covers must be the subject of critical commentary in order to be included in articles. This commentary may appear in the articles about each album, but it doesn't appear in a "List of" format. (ESkog)^(Talk) 16:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

"Fair use" galleries are not merely violation of WMF policy, but of copyright. Continued recalcitrant violation of copyright is grounds for blocking. Please stop it - David Gerard 17:12, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why I removed my images

Hello,Just64helpin, here's the explanation why I removed my images. That's why Thanks for posting them back. Sorry for the extra work. No reply is needed. Mbz1 01:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC)Mbz1

[edit] Interstella 5555 and WP:LEAD

WP:LEAD says "The lead should not "tease" the reader by hinting at but not explaining important facts that will appear later in the article. It should contain up to four paragraphs, should be carefully sourced as appropriate, and should be written in a clear, accessible style so as to invite a reading of the full article." It seemed the lead was a teaser, so I merged the history because of it. What's wrong with the spoilers? --w^L^{<speak·check>} 01:20, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wii?

Hi Just64helpin. Was just wondering why you felt that data compiled and sourced from a few days ago belongs in the "launch" article for the Wii, and not in the main article itself. I mean, the Wii's been past its launch for what, half a year now? Never Cry Wolf 14:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I got the numbers from Media Create: http://www.m-create.com/jpn/s_ranking.html Since the total number for Japan is correct, I just added this weeks number to the overall total. Lrrr IV 22:05, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I took a look at the edit history of the page. There appears that there was a citation provided, but it was removed because it doesn't provide the total sales. Lrrr IV 22:14, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] sopranos rv

Hi. Just an FYI for you regarding the rv you did to my addition on the Sopranos final episode page. The information I added was info that was moved from the main Sopranos page that was misplaced over there. As I noted in the comment section when I added it, it's possible that a simple rv removed a fact or two that was specific to the added text and didn't already exist on the episode page. Yes, agreed that the section became cluttered, hence my attempt to break it up into subsections to help a little. You might want to go back to see what was part of the rv and see if there's anything worth keeping. If not, no big deal to me; I was just cleaning up random stuff I saw. (I don't normally hang on the Sopranos pages). Cheers! SpikeJones 01:47, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I did notice the section on that page, however I think that there should be a couple of sentences noting the controversy and speculation and then a link to the Made in America episode article. It appears other editors came along and removed the link to the article and any mention of the series finale contoversy/speculation which I feel strongly is wrong. I also note that the article Made in America fails to mention the 30 second silence that David Chase wanted rather than the few seconds that aired (see the references). I think that is extremely important. Nodekeeper 03:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm fine with those edits, and I do see the David Chase/silence length mention at the end of the page in the Made in America article. However, I think that one more sentence noting the controversy and ambiguity citing the NYT article in the main Sopranos article would be appropriate.Nodekeeper 03:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I reviewed the style suggestions in WP:MOS-L. But from the viewpoint of an average reader (and not an editor) who may be interested in the ending and what it means, he may pass over the Made in America article, because there is no suggestion that there is any discussion about the ending there. This is not excessive linking in this context as there are 27 words and two links not counting the date link <10%. If that is an issue it would be better to remove the date link. It's not redundant for the issue I mention. It's this reason why there exists Wikipedia:Redirect for similar article titles (e.g. plurals) to help the reader find the information he is looking for. For this reason I restored the link.Nodekeeper 10:28, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

If you feel strongly about not having the link there, put it up for a vote on the talk page. It would be interesting how other editors see it.Nodekeeper 10:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

BTW, as a side note, all your hard work (or mine for that matter) will probably be undone on June 25. Nodekeeper 10:30, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

"Redirecting the word "meaning" to a section on interpretation is highly misleading. It can be mistaken for a link to the word meaning, or a link to a "solution" regarding the finale. Just64helpin 10:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)"

Well if you mouse over the link you would see that your cursor indicates that it goes to the Made in America article and not the word "meaning." I do not see how that is misleading. Nodekeeper 10:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I think that's a better edit. I was not suggesting democracy, I was trying to suggest Wikipedia:Consensus. But it's irrelevant as the current edit you did is better.Nodekeeper 11:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Malplaced disambig list

I appreciate that you are trying to help, but I would prefer that you not make corrections to the contents of my (or my bot's) User: space pages. Thanks. --Russ (talk) 19:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Block

Y	Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 161.185.1.100 lifted or expired. Request handled by: Yamla 19:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of The Moog

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on The Moog, by Axlq (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because The Moog seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting The Moog, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate The Moog itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 05:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Manhunt 2 Reference Consolidation

I understand why you would find it necessary to consolidate the references, however, if you check the content, they are under two seperate news post. The linked one, is for one thing, and what you referenced is an entire different news posting... Evilgohan2 19:41, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Explanation

The reason why I make several small edits is that if someone doesn't like a particular change, they can revert it without removing the rest of my work. As it was, I had a couple edit conflicts and was forced to adjust. The reason why everything was so linear was because I did not know how far I was going to go on this. Originally, I planned on only one reference as an example, which turned into two, which turned into six. Each time I remembered I had to remove that particular external link, and each time I thought I was done, and each time I kept doing more. I'm ready for the onslaught of reverts and anger, and the more precise the reverts can be, the better off we all are.

Plus, with a rather high traffic article like this, the recent history will be washed away with new edits soon anyway. I guess I expected a more positive reaction from the editors who wanted this heated debate on the talk page to end, whether it took nine edits or four.--Clyde (talk) 01:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History of Video Game Consoles (Seventh Generation) - GP2X

Can you state your reasons for reverting my last edit on this article; clearly, the GP2X is not nearly as well-known or popular as the other two consoles in this list, and that is why I believe it should be removed, as I stated. Nearly all major gaming sites do not list it as a major seventh generation handheld console, and sales figures everywhere reflect this as well.

It would have been nice if you actually stated your reason for reverting, also.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Haipa Doragon (talk • contribs).

(Sorry, I'm semi-new to Wikipedia, I keep forgetting to sign talk pages)

There was a discussion about this matter (obviously), and it was concluded with only three people replying, two against having the GP2X in the article, and one (seemingly biased) person for. I'm not bothering to revive it again for probably a similar discussion to occur. It's pretty obvious for most people anyway that this minor (and pretty wholly unknown) console was never a major contender in the video games industry, anyway. Haipa Doragon 20:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Just a notice that you haven't responded yet... Haipa Doragon 15:46, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

All right, then; however, there was a discussion about a month ago which, as I stated, ended with a larger number of people against than for the console's inclusion in the table. It didn't really feel so abrupt to me. Haipa Doragon 16:07, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Music page

Nice job copying my music page. ;) Just kidding. Douglasr007 06:52, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Pong

(This discussion has been moved to Talk:Pong#Re: Pong).

[edit] The Moog

Looks like I need to apologize; you have made the article look much better! Jmlk 1 7 21:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wii Correction

I did indeed make the change you had suggested from "Wii" to "The Wii". I also verified that the statement about 32 players via Wi-Fi was correct, as I had not heard anything about that. Everything looks good, but I was confused as to why you asked me to make the change as I've seen you make many valuable contributions to the article as well. We'll call this one a tag-team effort. Anyway, good luck on your edits and I commend you on that little catch. Useight 08:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I have italized "Medal of Honor: Heroes 2" also. Sorry to hear about the browser problem. Again, out of curiosity, how did you know I was active? Most nights I'm not active at 1:40AM, but I just put in a request to become an admin and I'm watching it anxiously. Useight 08:40, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, yeah, I knew you could check contributions by clicking "my contributions" on the top of the page and typing in a username, but I didn't think you had just randomly checked on mine and noticed I was editing. I thought maybe there was some sort of tool you had that listed active editors or something. But I guess not. Useight 08:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Daft Punk reference material

You mean the song articles about Daft Punk, right? I haven't really found sources about the songs themselves except for what is already posted. I still need to finish reading the French Connections book and see if anything about Daft Punk's songs are in it. By yeah, I could look for other sources. Douglasr007 08:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] HTML comments and section headings

Just so you know, HTML comments should go outside the section headings. (Contrary to this reversion.) Otherwise, it breaks linking to specific sections of the article. Silly rabbit 02:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Red links Techno

Why remove them? Were they not in any of the refrences? Curious, they may not merrit there own article (yet?) but do they merrit mentioning? Thanks. --Xiahou 21:25, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Technologic

You may consider my change to have been "text smashing", but do you think it looks better with the picture from the video all the way at the bottom where it can't even be seen? The text is rather short and wasn't oddly wrapped or anything, I definitely don't see anything wrong with it. Is there some guideline I violated? At the very least the picture from the video of the robot face should replace the picture in the infobox... -Mike Payne (T • C) 16:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Edited it so the picture is at the top without smashing the text. Any problems with this? -Mike Payne (T • C) 01:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] date tags

There is usually a bot called Smack Bot that fixes tags on Wiki articles automatically. Just so you know. Tehw1k1 21:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Daft Punk

I use "Guy Manuel" instead of the latter because a lot of the media simply refer him as that. I don't think I've ever seem him mentioned as "de Homem-Christo," to be honest regardless of proper style. Also, I want to ask why you removed my Musique bit on the Homework article. Of course the song never made it to the album but a lot of people wanted the song to be on the album (and probably expected it to be on the album) and Daft Punk teased people will adding the Musique bit on "WDPK 83.7 FM". I have to say there's going to be some disagreements with the editing I'm going to be doing with adds the bits of info from the book. Douglasr007 00:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

The date of the source isn't important in some cases - it's the question of the verification of the source. The book is made by Martin James who has done a lot of interviews with music over in Europe. The interviews in the book seemed to presented in a chronological order. I don't think the guy did the whole interview in 2003. The guy does mention a photo shoot with them in 1997 and they tried to ignored the interview being done with them. I have to agree that some of the quotes in the book do seem to conflict with what Daft Punk has said in other interviews, but it's still accurate to the point with the majority of things. Douglasr007 01:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I see now. I didn't know I was deleting the reference from the liner notes. I was trying to get that unsourced statement from February deleted. I'm trying to find a source for the influential electronica album statement. I can probably reword that thanks to sources from the book. After that, I'm going to try to get the article reviewed for good status. Thanks for the cleanup. Douglasr007 23:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:EDM

Hey there, have you considered joining WikiProject Electronic music? I'm always seeing your name on my watchlist under house and techno related articles, and I'm sure you'd be a valuable addition to the project! - Zeibura ^(Talk) 23:16, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

That's great, the project covers everything electronic music related - including genres, artists, albums, recordings, instruments, magazines etc. It just happens that a lot of the good/featured article pushes at the moment are related to genres and artists. Happy editing, - Zeibura ^(Talk) 23:37, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About the Wiimote edit I made

Why did you revert my edit in Wii article?? I just Google searched "Wiimote" and there are results. And when I edit the "Wii Remote" section, I put "also known as the "Wiimote" (diff), but why did my edit get reverted? It's TRUE!!!! -- PNiddy Go! 0 03:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Daft Punk article

Is there any particular reason you had the NERVE to delete my content about the Coney Island show?

We ARE talking about the MOST famous beach in the world, and the Coney Island Parachute Jump is one of Brooklyn's most prominent landmarks, and the landmark had matching lights to the band's helmets. I'm curious, that's not worth adding? Just in case you might have forgotten, living wherever you do, New York City is the world's "FIRST city," so I think you were way, way out of line deleting that 3 sentence addition.

It was ACCURATE, it was honest, and it WAS noteworthy, obviously not to you. Thanks again!

I'll repeat: you were WAY out of line deleting that. When's the last time Daft Punk played New York City? You're a big fan, whay don't you tell me?

[edit] Electronic Music classical

Thank you! I like it... ^-^ I like Nintendo also. Mother 3 ^-^ --Susume-eat 13:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank again! --Susume-eat 11:09, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Fabulous! Stupendous! I love! --Susume-eat 11:23, 19 August 2007 (UTC)