User talk:Marasmusine/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The deletion log says "Lists like this are superceded by categories". --McGeddon 16:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Still, there's other things you can do with a list, like list chronologically and annotate with notes. Oh well. Marasmusine 17:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The original article will presumably have been little different to Category:MU*_games (except all in one column, and not split up by initial letter), if you want to have a go at it... --McGeddon 08:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reliability of sources/links

You stated that user driven ratings sites are not considered reliable sources or places to be linked. I would for the most part agree, but it seems to me that it's reasonably within the idea of "using undependable sources only in articles about themselves" (in WP:SOURCE) to use such a group of such sources (independent of one another) to back up a statement that something is popular among internet users (vis how they rated it on those sites).

This also seems to fit #4 in links to consider (in WP:EL), specifically, not generally reliable sources that nevertheless contain information from people knowledgeable about a subject.

So I'm not convinced, after reading the referenced pages, that it was strictly necessary to remove the links and, then, to remove the statement the links were supporting. Can you elaborate further on your opinion on this topic please? Felisse 18:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure which article you want to discuss. As for the sources, I would argue that user-driven rakings are not entirely 'from people knowledgeable about a subject'; spam-voting from online games for example usually skews such results. Marasmusine 19:14, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

It took me a while to even remember, but it was about something in the Armageddon (MUD) page - it said you'd removed the statement about its popularity because it was sourced in unreliable references. I think it's descriptive enough to state that ratings sites for such things usually end up with this particular item rated highly by users, pointing at several such ratings sites that do in fact have that rating as evidence. Sure, it might have conceivably been ballot stuffing. But reliable sources often create polls in ways that are exactly as ballot stuffable (online polls in USA today or CNN and the like). I think the intent is more that factual assertions about the item under review can't be sourced in such ratings sites, not that the ratings themselves can't be referenced by Wikipedia as backup for a statement that such ratings exist.

so my idea is that "Users rate Funions highly as a snack on many snack-related opinion sites (link to customer opinionsite, ltco2, ltco3)" is all right, while "Funions contain no trans-fat and are low sodium (link to customer opinionsite reference)" is not acceptable and ought to be deleted. Also, "SnakRates site owner Lucy Cheezball is running an ad for Funions on all her pages (source: www.snakrates.bix)" would be okay, "SnakRates site owner Lucy Cheezball has been contracted to create ads for the new Cheeseball Flavor of funions (source:www.snakrates.bix)" would be okay, but slightly more dubious (for self promotion reasons - it should be okay as a source of information, but not as a source of notability, since it's self-promoting), while "Baseball star pitcher Johnny O'Salty is starring in an ad for Funions (source: www.snakrates.bix)" would need to be removed or resourced to a more reliable place. It's a matter of the self-referentiality making the site presumed to be more reliable with regards to self-proclaimed information about the topic, I think. Not to mention links to things that readers can see for themselves the accuracy of, vs things that the reader would have to take the unreliable source's word for. Felisse 22:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC) ps sorry for this being so long!

Ooooh... I'll read and digest your comments tomorrow :> Marašmusïne_Talk 23:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Movie tie-in (book)

Hi there: Sorry for my own confusion about what just happened to the "Movie tie-in" page. I think you have a good idea. I don't know if you are an admin or not, but I think it takes an admin to re-name the page from "Movie tie-in" to "Movie tie-in (book)", and I would gladly go and fix all the links that currently link there. I've never created a disambiguation page, but I'm willing to try that too. Then you could have a page for "Movie tie-in (video game)". Does that sound reasonable? If so, how can we get an admin to do it? Or can I just make a new page for "Movie tie-in (book)" and change all the links, then leave "Movie tie-in" to be the disambiguation page? Accounting4Taste 18:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I see your point of view regarding there being lots of different types of movie tie-in, and I think your re-naming idea is probably the way to go for now, which I will do in a moment. Marasmusine 19:07, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much -- fast, accurate, thorough, cooperative, helpful AND taught me what to do next time -- is there a barnstar for this? Bravo!! Accounting4Taste 20:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

You can give me a mini-barnstar if you like '*' :> Marasmusine 20:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to an editor who shared his experience with an less experienced editor in a friendly, fast, and useful way -- got the job done correctly and accurately, without missing any links -- improved Wikipedia -- and taught the newbie what to do next time in the process. Good enough to make the newbie look up how to award a barnstar and do it for the first time!! Accounting4Taste 20:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks :> Glad I could help. Marasmusine 20:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

(laughing) And now I know what page it goes on (slaps forehead), so thanks again. Accounting4Taste 20:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to drop me a note if you need any other wiki-advice. Marasmusine 20:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello Marasmusine. Thanks for helping me to improve the article about Fundamental modeling concepts. Since English is not my first language I may need a lot of help. Still I think that the Fundamental modeling concepts should be written Fundamental Modeling Concepts. Please compare at www.fmc-modeling.org. In my opinion this is similiar to the Unified Modeling Language, isn't it? Ivpen 06:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. FMC is not a company but a scientific method for software modeling. All books and papers I know about FMC use the capitalized version (I double checked it). Therefore I still think it should be written with upper cases. Ivpen 09:06, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

The books and papers may be using their own style guide. Wikipedia uses a particular style guide which may be different: WP:STYLE. Marasmusine 09:08, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

The link was very helpful. Thank you. I am still not completely convinced, but will leave it as is for the moment. Once again, thank you very much for your help. Ivpen 09:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nations of War

Hey how exactly am i supposed to verify the game? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DRS0506 (talk • contribs) 10:27, 17 June 2007

[edit] Task Force

Thanks for the welcome, I think I could contribute a fair amount to the Silent Hill project. The Silent Hill Characters article looks to me like it could use some SERIOUS work. I think that should be what we look at presently. Dan 21:54, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TinyURL whacking

The page you linked to was cited by Wired[1] (who phoned me to talk about it early enough in the morning that it woke me up) and the Jerusalem Post[2] as well. I would add this but it would break WP:COI. (For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not the FBI guy.) Marnanel 00:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

(Oh, oops, you have the Wired link in the references already. But it also cites the page I wrote, anyway.) Marnanel 00:02, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I've worked in the Jerusalem Post source as well. Glad I could help with your vanity searches :> Marasmusine 07:28, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An objection on Drag_Racer_V3

Hello Maras,

I'm against the deletion proposal you placed onto Drag_Racer_V3. If you have something to comment about this, please leave a message into Talk:Drag_Racer_V3. Thanks! ~Iceshark7 15:40, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Characters

Okay, so, hey. What are we gonna do with this friggin' characters page? I mean, try reading the Alessa Gillespie section. I dare you. It's almost not doable. Think you can handle fixing up that monstrosity?  :x Dan 20:03, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dan,most of it can simply be removed as having no real-world context and/or being indiscriminate information. The individual articles in Category:Silent Hill characters aren't much better. I was going to wait until a decision has been made on the Silent Hill influences and trivia AfD, but as I have the day off tomorrow, I'll go through List of Silent Hill characters and see what I can do! Marasmusine 22:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah, well then. I have the day off, too, so maybe we should make a game plan. Can't have us both trying to edit the same things. Dan 00:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I made a start, see what you think. Marasmusine 08:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I've begun work with the Silent Hill 2 section, and might also be able to do the Silent Hill 4 section after that. Tell me what you think.--Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 05:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

How much more work do you think the list needs? --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 06:43, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Some of the sections (particularly for those characters that already have their own article) are still too verbose, without much out-of-universe information. I'll do a bit more on it today. Marašmusïne_Talk 07:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Project Diaspora

Could you kindly explain in explicit detail as to why the Project Diaspora wiki is in your mind more of an advertisement then an informative page on the subject?

Could you also please give me an example of one of the many games, excluding any one you have worked on, that meet the criteria to stay on wikipedia. And most importantly, point out the differences in that example to mine. I am in great doubt and would like to be proven wrong.

As for the three fields the wiki does not suposedly meet the criteria for... WP:N Notability: Project Diaspora is the only mmorpg to offer a multiserver structure to mask many servers to act as one. The source for this is the game itself. WP:V Verifiability: How is it possible that the website and game itself not be a sufficient source? WP:OR No original research: The entire article is an informative writing with history and notable advances in its genre.

I believe you are being very particular and defensive as to the subject of games being placed on wikipedia. I do not know the extent of your intentions, they may be small and rather innocent but considering your rather broad and informativeless attack on the wiki it would be impossible to know exactly what you find wrong after reading your accusations and reading the actual Project Diaspora wiki. I believe any product no matter what will always have a thin line from being an good entry over being an advertisement.

I am a man that never takes kindly to someone disrupting my work without first convincing me first. I am going to remove your warning from my wiki page because after reviewing the fields which you believe I violate, I have found no reason why I violate them and therefor can not fix the wiki to your likings. It would be in great appreciation that you could help me understand your viewpoint so that we could come to a mutual understanding.

Hi, did you read the WP:N guideline or the WP:V policy? Here's one key point: A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Marasmusine 11:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

As for an example, here's one from the MMORPG category that I haven't contributed to (or even played): EverQuest. Note the reference section. Two BBC news articles and a Slashdot article, amongst others, thus fullfilling the requirement for independent, relaible, non-trivial references. Marasmusine 11:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I have no issue with you removing the proposed deletion template and will give you time to develop the article before taking any further action. Marasmusine 11:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh okay no problem, so mostly you would like to see links to news, reviews, fan sites, or anything of that nature referenced within the wiki.

Anything from a reliable source. From WP:Reliable sources: Reliable publications are those with an established structure for fact-checking and editorial oversight. Magazines, newspapers, some established internet sites like IGN or Gamespot; yep. Fan sites and wiki's; nope. Articles for online games often attempt verification through things like game directory sites, or sites with user-written reviews; again, not so reliable. Marasmusine 15:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay then, I think we can look at this on a flip side then. You are apart of a group that goes around wikipedia and decides which games are notable or not. If you are certain enough that the game is not notable, in a free environment, why am I the only one seeking others to defend my opinion? If the game is not notable, then why are you, a person who knows nothing about the game, the only one who thinks it is not notable enough to continuely harass it / harass it at all? If it so threateningly unnotable, shouldn't someone else be able to make the same claims you are? Or is the rest of the world too niave to determine that themselves and you really should protect them from the knowledge of this games extistance and what it is amongst it's peers.

It's kind of hard to get the level of professional press coverage you are seeking in a market such as this. I don't see why that should be a determining factor for notability. Quite frankly, I can't see how anyone could actually appoint themselves to such a position as the official decider of worthiness in games. This game has 2 years of on and off development in to it, have you even been apart of this task force for that long? I don't see why any article at all on this wikipedia should be attacked if it is written in a descriptive format - so please quit making my wiki entry look like trash and a scam just because you know nothing about it.

This game is a clone of a game called Diaspora. Diaspora itself does actually have the kind of press coverage you are seeking, I could put those references in my wiki but I'd rather keep my project independent of it's origin, atleast for it's wiki's sake. Don't you agree that a wiki on a game/subject/item should be displayed as it's own entry and not some half page of something else? But if it's a full clone/continuation of something notable, wouldn't that therefor make it notable itself?

No one should be policing this kind of topic, you should dissolve that task force.

Hello. WP:Verifiability is Wikipedia policy, which I didn't write, but everyone should be applying. Neither did I write the WP:Notability guideline, which is what I'm using to 'go around deciding what is notable or not'. Both of these I am using to apply the notability concern and primarysources tags, a fairly routine procedure - or 'making the entry look like trash', in your words.

Since you are taking this so personally, I'll also point out the Wikipedia:Ownership of articles policy to you. Marasmusine 14:38, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello Again

Hey, I am the one you adopted a while ago. You're probably wondering why I haven't edited recently. The truth is, I have gotten addicted to the video game The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. BUT there is good news - I am sort of improving my 'Wiki skills' by editing UESPWiki at UESP.net. So, you can monitor my progress there if you want. And I'm probably going to start editing on Wikipedia again, although it is slightly challenging because it is so popular that there is little to fix (at least, that I can notice)! So, please don't forget about me. By the way, how am I supposed to change the way it says Emilio so that it says my username? Thanks Emilio 20:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Excellent, welcome back :> I don't blame you for being addicted to Oblivion, it's pretty good (if you've got a decent graphics card and memory) I'll take a look at UESP.net. Not sure about the username thingy. Do you want your signature to say crack-a-back, or Emilio? Anyways, I can think of plenty of projects here for you to help with :> Marasmusine 21:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

OK. I actually have the worst computer ever (worsted (is that a word?) only by my other one. The one I'm using is a Pavilion a400y - was cr*p two years ago, still is today. It runs Half-Life 2 on its lowest settings at 2 FPS at the most. I am forced to use my PS3, and I can't use mods other than the Knights of the Nine plugin. Oh, and I want it to say crack-a-back. I know its a silly name but its easier for people to remember... since it is so wierd. And what can I help with?

And I have a question. I know I look like an idiot saying this, but how do you do that thing in the edit summary that has a line and in gray the name of the section edited? Thanks a lot. Emilio 20:35, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey :> Since that's your username (which makes you sound like a professional wrestler :>) it should print automatically when you do four tildes ~~~~. If it's not, then check your preferences (under My Preferences at the top of the screen) and see what's in the 'signature' box.

The section edit occurs when you click on 'edit' next to a header, rather than 'edit this page' at the top. The main advantage there is that it allows two people to work on two seperate sections at once.

As for what you can help with; well there's the unglamourous task of Category:Category needed for example, which can be a bit boring but is awesome for learning the category structure here.

Or if you like, we can pick a video game article at random and clean it/expand it (believe me, they all need work doing on them), or I can show you how I go about making a new article from scratch. Marasmusine 20:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... well, I don't feel I'm ready to learn about categories, I think I'm still getting used to the basics, and starting a new article seems sort of like a basic, but cleaning and expanding pages is something that I would do commonly, and so it is important that I know how to do it really good. So how about that (picking a random video game article)? Also, thanks for telling me about section edits, because that would've been helpful to me. CRACK-A-BACK 23:52, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warhound

yo thanx man. safe for doing the article up a bit. i'm new and not that good at writing but i got good information thou.. Oli3 01:47, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the revision to my AfD, didn't think it went through originally, but thanks for all your help.

Kevinwong913 ^{Speak out loud!} 23:30, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Silent Hill Characters collaboration

I see you've apparently announced List of Silent Hill characters to be the first priority of the Silent Hill task force. Two things...

1. Shouldn't work be brought first to the main article on the series?
2. Shouldn't such an announcement be made on the main page of the task force? --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 22:19, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Personally I would prefer to tidy up the peripheral articles first. My announcement on the task force talk page wasn't meant to be a directive (although in retrospective, it does sound like one.)

Thanks for your help with the Silent Hill articles. If you think we should go straight to work on the main articles then let's do that... I've just found the Silent Hill 3' review from Edge magazine. Marašmusïne_Talk 08:16, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps some sort of directive might be needed. Do task forces typically have monthly collaborations or something like that? --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 17:09, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure, I've never really been in a task force before! Marašmusïne_Talk 17:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It might be ideal to put some sort of "requests" section on the Task Force main page so that users can request specific tasks to be accomplished for the relevant articles. Through this some sort of direction could be created. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 21:09, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I saw you mention a Task List on the page. Is that the To-Do list on the top of the main task force page or is there some other section on some page that I'm missing? --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 16:33, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, we haven't got a task list yet :> Feel free to start one. Thanks for adding the monster articles to the list. Current "to-do" is add the task force tag to these articles, per the opening paragraph of Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Silent Hill. Marašmusïne_Talk 16:37, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

That task is done except for Christabella (who probably doesn't even fall under WP:CVG and could very well just be redirected to the film's article) and Victim 07+08 (which I've PROD-ded for deletion). --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 17:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Do you think that requests on a task list should be accompanied by the requester's signature? --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 17:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Nah. I agree with the proposed deletion of Christabella; a horrible page. Marašmusïne_Talk 18:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I just PROD-ded that one as well. Will try to start some sort of request list. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 19:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

I was unaware that I could not do that it will not happen again.

That's okay. I've left some useful links on your IP user page. Marašmusïne_Talk 08:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orion's Belt Game

Hello... may I know why you deleted Orion's Belt Game article? This is a game like Ogame or Darkagalaxy, and I think it deserves its space in wikipedia... I honestly don't understand.

I'll reply on your talk page. Marašmusïne_Talk 17:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Just... wow.

Been looking at what you've done to the Silent Hill list of characters, and I've reached a simple conclusion. You sir, are a god. The edits you've made are outstanding, and are far better than anything I ever could have done. I wish I could contribute like that, but I find it hard to do anything other than small corrections. Dan 18:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Why thankyou! It's the simple application of policies and guidelines :> You're always bound to upset someone when you make changes like that though. Marašmusïne_Talk 18:47, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I have a lot of reading to do, I think. I still don't think I'll ever be able to make big edits like that. I'm kind of a behind-the-scenes guy. I just kinda try to pick off vandalism, and errors in people's English and such.  :x Dan 18:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry. It took me about a year of editing before I finally started to 'get it'. Marašmusïne_Talk 18:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dated Tags

Thanks for tagging. However this is July, not June. Please update the month on your dated tags. Hu 13:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

It's July already?! Holy moly! Marašmusïne_Talk 13:53, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning your removal of a citation on Sauerbraten

On the Sauerbraten (game) article, I cited the statement "It has been briefly featured in a Burger King television commercial." by providing a link to a forum where the game's creator gave a link to the commercial. I believe this will be removed without a citation, so how can I back up this claim? Am I supposed to link directly to the video file? The statement about the game being in the commercial is true, and anyone who watches the commercial will see this, but since that would be original research I am confused about how I'm supposed to back up the claim. --Noerrorsfound 22:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

We only report what has already been reported in independent, WP:reliable sources. It doesn't matter if it's true or not; see the opening sentence of WP:Verifiability. At the moment it's original research :/ Since linking to the video itself isn't acceptable, I can only suggest searching material from gaming magazines or from Burger King themselves. Sorry if it sounds like I'm picking on the article :/ Marašmusïne_Talk 09:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Keep up the good work.

It seems, Marasmusine, that you are determined to rid Wikipedia of non-notable articles and bad references. I appluad your adherence to the strictist possible interpretation of Wikipedia guidlines. I particularly noticed your excellent work on the article about the game Sauerbraten. You removed many references and nominated it for deletion as per some guidline (I'm sure you know which one).

I regret to inform you that, while your work on the Sauerbraten article is appreciated, you have left many other articles about unnotable software and video games untouched. It seems you have a lot of work ahead of you. Good luck, and thanks again for your dedication!

I have not nominated Sauerbraten (game) for deletion. Perhaps you are thinking about the {{notability}} tag I added some time ago.

Apologies for leaving so many articles untouched. Perhaps it's because there are flipping thousands of them. Marašmusïne_Talk 07:23, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Silent Hill

Thanks!

Two things: can you check there's consensus on the talk page, at least to the point of "I think it's ready, if anyone else sees stuff worth moving please do so, then confirm they're done". Something to check you have some consensus it has had the decent content dealt with. Then just tag it speedy delete, pointing to the AFD header and evidence of consensus (or stalling) on the talk page. If theres a problem, let me know. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 07:30, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Will do, thanks. Marašmusïne_Talk 13:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Silent Hill AFD - a footnote

I've deleted the page, and many thanks.

I'm also using the deleted page as an example for a policy discussion, over at Wikipedia_talk:Deletion_process#Update_and_discussion_needed_on_merge_and_similar_closes for a few days. Feel free to comment if you have views :)

Many thanks! FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 10:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Naked Killer trivia

Hi, You removed the trivia section from Naked Killer. I'd just like to know why. Cheers, --Marktreut 13:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your AIV report

Thank you for making a report about 24.210.83.241 (talk · contribs · block log) at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators generally only block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. In this case apart from the editors previous personal attacks for which he was correctly blocked, this time he has not recieved a final warning for vandalism so no block will be issued. Having looked through his contribution this is not vandalism but a content dispute. ^Khukri 22:25, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I've started with a uw-delete2 to cover his blind reverts. Marašmusïne_Talk 22:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Good stuff, I've been looking through your editing history, you've amassed a fair impressive amount of good edits. If you wouldn't mind a pointer and not sure if you're aware but in preferences there's a tick box that gives you a reminder if you have not added an edit summary. Looking here it's the only thing on a really, and I mean it, good editing history. ^Khukri 22:39, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Tick box now ticked! Thanks. Marašmusïne_Talk 08:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] fernando martinez

help me improve the fernando martinez article. what should i do or if you feel you need to make some changes. thanks.

I've replied on your talk page. Marašmusïne_Talk 09:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Outwar

I've added two related articles to your AFD nomination for this. I hope that you don't mind. Jauerback 18:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, they are all related and suffer from the same problems, so I don't mind. As long as it doesn't turn into one of those batch AfDs that end up as 'Keep' because of comments like "this nomination is too big, relist!" :> Marašmusïne_Talk 18:25, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] what happened to fernando?

there's something i don't get. the bruce wayne and other superhero articles have tons of in-universe info. why delete the the fernando martinez one?

Fernando Martinez isn't notable outside the context of the game. Marašmusïne_Talk 08:09, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Hell, he's not even notable inside the context of the game. Marašmusïne_Talk 08:35, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] That space colony game

It sounds like you're describing K240, but I don't think that was released on the NES. But does it look similar? Marašmusïne_Talk 19:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't really look like this game. The game was mostly ran through menus, if I remember correctly. Eventually you would be attacked, and I was always obliterated; I guess I never had enough laser turrets or war ships. --MKnight9989 12:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, okay, I'll keep my eyes out though! Marašmusïne_Talk 15:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

The name of the game is Overlord. Thanks anyway, though. --MKnight9989 12:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

This one? [3] I think it looks interesting even though this guy hasn't given it a good review. Maybe I'll take a look on an emulator. Marašmusïne_Talk 17:25, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Retro Gamer - Creating Chaos

I've got a copy of this article if you're still interested. I can forward you a means to access the first 30 copies of Retro Gamer on pdf if you'd like, just give me an email. - hahnchen 15:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Free MMORPG

want a source,eh? i'll give you a source http://atc.legnonline.net/ GG!

No, that's not a reliable source as it's not independent. Please see WP:N and WP:V. Marašmusïne_Talk 20:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cthulhu Nation Links Question

Rather than contesting your removal of the Wiki/Forum links, I'm curious what the reasoning of it is as I originally based the article off the - very similiar - Urban Dead game article. It has an outside link to the Urban Dead Wiki and an Unofficial game map. Because of that, I put the forum and wiki from Cthulhu Nation in. Is there some reason Urban Dead's page has for keeping those links, but not Cthulhu Nation's? I'd just like some clarification on that. Thank you in advance. PseudoSherlock 18:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Links to forums and wikis are to be avoided, see WP:External links#Links normally to be avoided points 10 and 12. Also, external links to be kept to a minimum; if official forums and wikis can be reached from the 'official site', then only the latter needs linking to. There's no particluar reason for Urban Dead keeping the links, in fact I'll remove them now. Marašmusïne_Talk 18:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Good to know. Thank you. PseudoSherlock 20:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Web Boxing League

I've posted comments on your Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Web Boxing League along with my objection to deletion. Please visit the page and respond.

Thank you.

--Art of Pugilism 20:07, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• So, after browsing around Wikipedia, I come to find out ironically that you are a member of the task force onWikiProject Massively Multiplayer Online Games. On that page you list more than 50 such articles that are not notable or marginally notable, yet none that I could see have been marked for deletion, but rather tagged for notability. This perplexes me. Here you are ostensibly attempting to increase the number of multiplayer online games and you summarily drop a deletion discussion on our article without even attempting to help us figure out how to establish notability. That seems to me to be pretty inconsistent. Now that we have been deleted, we are going about having the right type of articles written and we are confident that eventually we will get our article reinstated. Yet we have to accomplish this in exile as other non-notable sites remain. While dozens of sites languished with notability tags, you were leading the charge in a dismissive fashion to have us deleted. Where is the sense in that? That seems to me to be contrary to the mission of your own task force. I could very easily turn into a vindictive deletionist and drop delete tags on every one of the sites you list there, basically turning your own arguments against you. Of course I won't because I really support what that task force is doing, but it seems mighty inconsistent for you to arbitrarily drop a deletion discussion on us without a notability tag or some prior communication. It is all water under the bridge, but it strikes me as having been grossly unfair and somewhat hypocritical. --Art of Pugilism_Talk 03:07, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

  The list of unnotable MUDs you are referring to had already been taken to AfD before as a batch nomination (although I wasn't responsible for that). It was my intention to use a WP:PROD tag on each of them, but because they have been through AfD, I can't. In any event, I will be checking for possible sources before taking them individually back to AfD.

  I was considering using a prod tag on the Boxing League article, but I had a feeling that it would be contested, and prod tags should only be used on "uncontroversial deletion candidates"; taking it to AfD was the correct procedure in this case.

  Due to your verbose defense of the article and your above mentioned attempts to establish independent articles, I would also ask you to read WP:COI. Marašmusïne_Talk 08:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

• We can get philosophical but based on WP:COI probably 90% of all "editors" have a COI. The very motivation to take inordinate amounts of time to write in-depth articles, research and edit them presupposes an allegiance to the subject matter. A collaborative effort such as Wikipedia, where the only qualifications to be an editor are a computer and an internet connection, begs for COI as an indiginous and almost essential part of the process. Sure, I play the game and I love it. I worked hard to produce a good descriptive article about it and I believe it is sufficiently important in the world of online gaming that it merits mention here. However, that is no different from a lifelong researcher writing an article on mollusks who doesn't want his article deleted. The difference is he has a cornucopia of sources to cite. While I appreciate the efforts of Wikipedia's pure editors, who have the interests of Wikipedia at heart, the vast majority of editors here are really writers. If you eliminated all the COI, you would have virtually no content.

• And by the way, my apologies on my verbosity but I consider verbosity in the art of argument to be a virtue. Argument without verbosity is vapid, dry and unpersuasive. Editors like conciseness. Writers prefer to expound. That's why generally the two have different functions, one practical the other creative. You are obviously the former. Thanks for the verbal spar. I always enjoy a good fight (guess that's why I play a boxing game). --Art of Pugilism_Talk 11:57, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

  That's okay, I just wanted to make sure you weren't a staff member of the game, or someone who was otherwise trying to 'advertise' the game here. I appreciate the amount of work you put into the article, but (and I quote from the edit page itself) If you don't want your material to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it.

  I wish you luck in gathering sources, there is no prejudice towards article recreation in this case. Marašmusïne_Talk 12:14, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Xconq

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Xconq, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Whispering 16:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I wont contest it; I've been trying to find some sources without success. Marašmusïne_Talk 17:21, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:EL interpetation

Hey, I noticed you were removing links to muds themselves, in the form of telnet addresses. I'm not sure why these would violate EL though. I had a look, and I couldn't find a relevant guideline for it. Martijn Hoekstra 23:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Martijn. I'm removing them on the basis of: Links should be kept to a minimum. (If there is a link to the official site, then that will have the telnet link on anyway); Try to avoid linking to multiple pages from the same website (Again, telnet link is redudant if there is a link to the official site). I also think it's a little bit promotional to provide a link straight into the game.

However, I won't contest it if you feel they should stay on there. Marašmusïne_Talk 07:40, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Nah, I was a bit ambivalent over them as well, but my own policy has always been, if nut sure, than keep it. It just made sense to me that on an article about a game, you have a link to the game itself. Martijn Hoekstra 14:17, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My speedy deletions

Hi Johnny. Please stop adding speedy deletion tags for a moment and re-read WP:SPEEDY. Not only are some of the articles not blatant advertising, but one (UFO: Alien Invasion) has already been through an AfD process (and therefore cannot be speedied). Thanks, Marašmusïne_Talk 17:08, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I've also changed your speedy on TetriNET to an AfD instead, should you wish to comment there. Marašmusïne_Talk 17:19, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry. Several similar articles I was planning on AfDing had been speedily deleted in the last few days, so I thought I would try it. It's just a pain to go through the AfD process when there is a list of articles, I guess I was looking for shortcuts. Ceased and desisted. ~ JohnnyMrNinja _{talk} 17:24, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Also, thanks for putting that article on AfD. I'll try not to make anyone clean up after me in the future :). ~ JohnnyMrNinja _{talk} 17:28, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Johnny, no harm done. Setting up AfD's is a pain. You could also consider using WP:PROD if the article hasn't already been prod'd or afd'd before. Also consider listing your CVG AfD's here (although that's entirely optional :> ) Marašmusïne_Talk 17:29, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Slightly unrelated question, if an article has already been up for AfD but no consensus was reached, will relisting it automatically reopen the discussion? And is there a waiting period after an article has come off of AfD before it can be relisted? ~ JohnnyMrNinja _{talk} 17:45, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

You use {{subst:afdx}} instead of {{subst:afd1}}, so that a seperate "2nd nomination" page is made; see the small print in Wp:AfD. If you use the normal afd1 template, it just links to the original AfD. As for the time periods involved, I'm not sure. Obviously not immediately, but I've seem them as close together as three months. Also read the previous AfD carefully and explain your re-nomination well. Marašmusïne_Talk 18:33, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fighting game

Could you please take a look at Talk:Fighting game? This guy is obsessed with the game Kwonho. He kept adding SPAM links, and a ton of irrelevant info. When someone deleted it, he freaked out. I've put a SPAM warning on his talk page, but he is still adding internal links, and trying to claim that I am working for Namco or something. I've requested protection for the page but nothing happened, so I just did it again. ~ JohnnyMrNinja _{talk} 19:27, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a look. Marašmusïne_Talk 19:50, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How would you feel about...

RfA? Martijn Hoekstra 19:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

For you or for me? :> Marašmusïne_Talk 19:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

for you, silly! Martijn Hoekstra 19:37, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Heh, have to say I'm a bit nervous, but if you think I can cut the mustard, I accept. Thanks, Marašmusïne_Talk 19:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

damn template... Can't get it on a proper place on your page. Move it any way you want to make it look better. Martijn Hoekstra 20:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

That works, but you're allowed to be a little proud, and have it somewhere toplike. If you'd like that that is. Martijn Hoekstra 20:17, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Ooooh, I don't know :> Thanks again for the nomination, I'm going through the questions now. Marašmusïne_Talk 20:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

:D Martijn Hoekstra 21:51, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: To Acid Arena

I am doing it right now. Sorry for the the mess, actually i am still in learning phase. Congratulations on your nomination for Admin. :)

[edit] Marvel: Ultimate Alliance

I'm thinking of getting this game for game boy, but I can't understand chat on the page, and I was wondering if you can answer a question for me.

If your question is about Daredevil being in the GBA version, then I don't know the answer. Careful though, some reviewers think the game is terrible!. Marašmusïne_Talk 17:37, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks anyway.

[edit] GANGSTER MIND

YES, IT IS A VERY GOOD ARTICLE, SO GET A FUCKING LIFE AND FUCK UP SOMETHING ELSE, FOR FUCKS SAKE.--Willy, your mate 07:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

How charming. Marašmusïne_Talk 13:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA was successful

Congratulations, your RfA was successful and you are now a sysop. You may wish to add yourself to WP:LA. Good luck. --Deskana (banana) 21:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Congrats Murasmusine! You really deserved it. I'm not a admin, but good luck! --Hirohisat ^Talk 21:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Hirohisat has given you a coquí and a cookie! Cookies and Coquíes both reminds us of Darth Vader's breathing, and as Eddie mentions, some how promote WikiLove. Hopefully, this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to another human!

Thank you all very much, I can go to bed happy :> Marasmusine_Talk 21:33, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how you did it after that GANGSTER MIND debacle, but congratulations. Well deserved. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 04:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Congrats

Congratulations on your successful RfA. --Altruism^{T a l k - Contribs.} 04:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#Wikidudeman if you haven't so far. Thanking You, Altruism^{T a l k - Contribs.} 05:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Still mulling over Wikidudeman's RfA. Marasmusine 08:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

• Congratulations!! :) - Alison ☺ 10:48, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Yay! I'm just wondering how to place that unobtrusive 'admin' marker on the top-right of my user page. Don't tell me, I'll figure it out :> Oh, boggle, d'oh! You've done it for me :> Marasmusine 10:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

(ec) Too late :) - Alison ☺ 10:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Congrats on a sucessful RFA! Politics rule 11:17, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ALSong AfD

Oy vey! Usually I catch that sort of thing thanks for catching it for me, hey could you do me a favor and close the Avira AfD for me? Whispering 13:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Was beaten to it. Marasmusine 16:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh and congrats on your succesful RfA. Whispering 17:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou :> Marasmusine 17:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Just a question

Why did you use template:closing on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bosses in The Ocean Hunter? I didn't think that closing AfDs usually took very much time, especially when you don't write a particularly long summary. I'm just curious why you did it. --Eyrian 17:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm taking my time. I've only just become an admin, these are my first few closures. I'm being careful at first, following Wikipedia:Deletion process :> Marasmusine 17:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Specifically, I wanted to take my time when comparing the merge and delete opinions. Marasmusine 18:01, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Would it be okay to have the article redirect to The Ocean Hunter, not recreated, just redirected. This way if anyone types in list of bosses, they'll just be taken to the main article. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, done. Marasmusine 18:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Asking for complete explanation

Ok, You said I could ask, so here I am... As you so aptly stated the GW page notes that GW is the largest company in that industry and is listed on the LSE, however, as usual with this type of thing, you FAILED to answer the full question - Give me the reason that Wargames Foundry is listed among other similar entries that are NOT SE listed or have no notable position other than their AGE.

Additionally, being listed on a stock exchange is not such a notable thing - there are literally tens of thousands of companies listed on stock exchanges - and many companies claim to be the largest or the oldest, etc., however, when the investigation clears, many of them reached their claim to fame for only a brief quarter at best - does this qualify a company? It seems to me that there is never a place for the little guy until he becomes the big dog in the game. Of course, that still doesn't explain companies such as WF and Clash of Arms, etc. being listed in wikipedia under this criteria.

Please help me to understand what the difference is between the companies that you choose to allow to be listed and those that you do not. And please don't paste a link with a bunch of mumbo jumbo in it, answer my question directly.

Thank You.

Firstly, I'm not going to start comparing articles with each other. When judging an article, I'm going to look at that article alone, on it's own merits.

Secondly, subjects for Wikipedia articles need to be notable. Although there are a few ways of judging this, the general criteria for notability is: A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

If you yourself feel that Wikipedia articles such as Clash of Arms don't meet our notability guidelines, then go ahead and propose it for deletion. However I'm afraid I can't advise you on how to do that without "pasting a link with a bunch of mumbo jumbo in it". Marasmusine 19:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I will say this much for you guys - when you apply your arbitrary methodology and judgement you sure don't waste any time deleting an article. This article wasn't even an hour old when you proposed the zap, and less than 24 hours later, it was gone. I can't even find the original text that was presented - the "appeal" process here sure is swift - given that you are only allowed ONE opportunity to make your case before the entry is vaporized. I thought that maybe becoming an editor and beginning the process of filling out information in an industry that I am familiar with would be helpful. My legal studies prohibited me from using Wikipedia as a source for any information - I think I more fully understand why now - it isn't just the inaccurate information contained in Wikipedia (though bad reporting and biased social study provides more than enough "reputable" material to keep the propaganda listed) - the professors must also know how good information that may not have been fully "verified" is removed while the misleading and inaccurate information remains.

You don't have to bother with a reply - I wouldn't want to cause you to move past your "mumbo jumbo" block. This really was a waste of time. With this experience, I too will ban students from using Wikipedia as a reference. I suppose being listed in the International Who's Who wouldn't qualify as notable either!

On the offchance you do read this reply, I'd be happy to recover the article and place it on a subpage in your user page if you want to work on it some more. Marasmusine 19:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

That is at least a start - though I am still not convinced that it would make much difference, nor am I convinced that the existing system in WP will do much to correct the independently verifiable propaganda that exists in its entries. If you do provide the text, I will copy it, re-evauate it, and present it to the help desk to find out exactly what will be necessary for proper inclusion.

On a second note - am I to assume that because a company is listed on a stock exchange that it can be entered into WP? (That is what I read from your reason to exclude this listing, but keep the GW listing.) Though you never did answer the question concerning the other noted entries that are virtually identical to the one deleted.

The article is now located here: User:Obewanz/Miniature GameWorks.

Okay, I'll take a look at some of the other articles you mentioned. Clash of Arms can be deleted. Wargames Foundry can be deleted. Neither assert their subject's importance or significance, neither use third-party references to verify the information. They still exist on WP because no-one has deleted them yet. Wikipedia:Do you ever go fishing? is a good essay on this subject, as is the related WP:OTHERSTUFF.

I know you didn't want me to post links to any policies, but the best advice I can give you is to read through WP:Verifiability. Essentially we only report what has already been reported. If those sources happen to be magazine articles or reviews on reliable websites, then that's pretty much Notability sorted out too.

On a final note, being listed on a stock exchange is something I thought used to be one possible criteria for companies last year. a)I mis-remembered slightly and b)it's changed since then. However, the Games Workshop article still has independent references (of varying quality).

Best of luck, Marasmusine 07:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, so would the following links be considered acceptable or should they be deleted? (I'm finding things that I am not sure why they are here so that I can better understand what falls within the acceptable entries and what genuinely constitutes "advertising" within Wikipedia.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amarillo_Design_Bureau_Inc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Fleet_Universe

Since you have taken the time to respond with what appears to be a genuine desire to explain - I must give you credit for that and accept that while many listings within WP proabably do not belong per WP policy, or WP policy has not addressed the erroneous entries thoroughly, there appears to at least be an effort to make corrections in a non-discriminatory manner. Given this opinion; to correct that which is wrong, one must examine the framework and understand that which is necessary to make the correction. Hence the reason I am submitting references to entries - hopefully it won't take me long to understand that framework.

Also as a follow-up; is it possible (or permissible) that an editor created an index page linking to each of the various game manufacturers as part of the miniature wargaming article entries? I don't fully understand how this "stub" works, or is supposed to work.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wargame_stubs

Thanks

--

I requested deletion of the pages that you verified above should be deleted and my deletion requests were promptly removed by Mysdaao. Can you please look into this and explain why the requests were deleted instead of the article entries?

Thanks

I'll explain the best I can, sorry if the following is a lot to take in.

The speedy deletion tag you added, Template:db-author, is used by editors to ask that an article that they alone have worked on to be deleted. Since you are not the original and only editor to those articles, it was not a valid reason. There are three ways to ask for an article to be deleted. The first is a speedy deletion, which only applies to certain kinds of article. In these examples you could probably get away with using Template:db-nn: It is an article about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content that does not assert the importance or significance of the subject. (which if I remember correctly, was the request behind the deletion of Miniature GameWorks.). Where an article does not meet the criteria for a speedy deletion, you can propose an article for deletion (WP:AfD for a discussion, or WP:PROD for anything uncontroversial; takes about 5 days in either case.)

Amarillo_Design_Bureau_Inc and Star_Fleet_Universe: These are part of a large category of related articles: Category:Star Fleet Universe. Independent references appear to be rather thin on the ground. If I were an interested party, because of the scope of the category, I would first make a request for more references (using the {{primarysources}} tag. If nothing was forthcoming, I would consider taking them to WP:AFD, which is where wikipedians discuss whether an article should be deleted or not.

I can't say I use stubs much, I tend to write whole articles in one go. More information on stubs can be found here: Wikipedia:Stub.

Marasmusine 14:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm sorry this is turning into such a lengthy discussion, but maybe it will help others (as well as myself) to understand how this really works. It's one thing to read a policy link, etc., it's quite another to have a real-world example and have someone explain the process. Too often I see references placed to this policy or that policy, etc. to only find that when questioned the person posting the link really has no clue as to what they are posting, or if they do, many do so without fully understanding the content within the post and make assumptions that when forced to explain, they cannot, hence the action becomes non-credible.

This discussion is teaching me quite a bit more about the actual process/workings of meaningful contribution to Wikipedia than merely reading the psuedo-code policy pages that are referenced. There is more to this than merely hitting the "edit" link in an article/entry and updating a few lines of text. Obewanz 14:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I was so snappy to begin with, feel free to ask me anything in future :> Marasmusine 16:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm done with this BS. Sorry that your efforts Marasmusine were in vain. I really wanted to help clean up the information in WP and provide accurate information. Even after my first listing was Speedy Deleted - I still felt that maybe the listing didn't need to be included given the information that you provided. However, there are hundreds of listings that are IDENTICAL that people are fighting to retain and are using my listing as being deleted as a reason that I would attempt to have other listings deleted - even though they never saw the listing that I made, nor gave any consideration in comparison to why delete one and not the other. It just proved what my professors in college had to say and what I now say to my students "Wikipedia is NOT a reputable source"...

Thanks for your attempts to guide me on making appropriate corrections - but I don't think you'll have much success on anything that is already listed - even if it is identical to what has already been deleted. I do wish you luck and hope that you somehow will be able to have an impact to correct the situation, but I do not hold out much hope. I have no intention of posting again to WP and frankly don't care what happens here now. Sour Grapes alright - just not in the way others have expressed - or the direction. Good Luck!