User talk:Masem
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Archives | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
[edit] AfD idea
I'm reading through your proposal at the moment (well, to be pedantic, I'm typing this message, but you know what I mean 
). It is a very interesting idea, and I expect I'll comment when I've had a chance to think it through properly. I just wanted to suggest posting a note at WT:DP, and perhaps at the village pump, to let people know about it. Jakew (talk) 20:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure what you changed here, but you seem to have accidentally make a second copy of the entire talk page text! Jakew (talk) 13:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Argh!
I'm sorry, I just overwrote your summary in Survivor: Micronesia. I saw you revert the anonymous editor in the history and I thought that was the edit conflict I was ignoring. I've restored your version. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- No worries :) but feel free to edit to taste, your version captured some details I didn't mention. --MASEM 04:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 18 | 2 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 19 | 9 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WP:LOTM
Congratulations on your recent WP:FL. In case you do not know, we are running an experiment to choose the List of the Month and Lists of the Day for June. Feel free to nominate your list at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/Nominees/200807 for consideration next month to be the July LOTM or a LOTD. If you would like to support this experiment the most important thing you can do is come by and vote at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/voting/200806. My talk page is always open.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Not plot, a suggestion
Ok, a bit of realism here :) Your proposed amendment to WP:PLOT will never gain consensus simply because many editors will never agree with anything prescriptive in a page that is "policy" rather than "guideline". An amendment is surely needed, however, because it would finally speed up the removal of information that should be removed but is currently stuck in Wiki limbo.
The problem, I think, is that the current policy on WP:PLOT is precisely that it focuses on plots too much. Information like the weight of random comic book characters is not plot information, yet should fall under this very same policy of what Wikipedia is not.
The largest amendment one can get into WP:NOT is a few words I think, so I propose to add a few words to WP:PLOT to make the existing policy cover not only the plot, but also "in-depth descriptions of the content of the work" as you put it. What about:
"Plot summaries. Wikipedia articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development and historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot or in-depth descriptions of the content of the work. This applies to both stand-alone works and series. A concise plot summary is appropriate as part of the larger coverage of a fictional work."
User:Krator (t c) 13:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
- I am well aware that "plot summaries" some take literally, some take more broadly, which is why I've been trying to suggest a wording that is more broad "the content of a published work", which includes characters, setting, etc, in addition to plot. Of course, I don't see it taking much hold right now, but I don't want to push it -- I want to see how it goes. --MASEM 15:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
- I think the wording "content" is in fact the first step towards finding something that might be generally acceptable. It also has the advantage that it no longer applies applies article by article but topic by topic, whether in one or more articles. As a guide to finding consensus on this and FICT, I recognize that we fiction maximalists will not get a wording of these that requires in-depth coverage, but the minimalists should also recognize that they will not get consensus on one that excludes in-depth coverage. If it's not left open, there will not be consensus. Whichever side one thinks is in the majority, the minority is too strong. DGG (talk) 20:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Crazy Taxi (series)
I've not been around for a while, but great job on Crazy Taxi (series), it looks awesome. I never would have guessed it would end up on the main page. It just goes to show that a mediocre topic can make a great article if written well. Cheers. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 09:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock
If you have a chance, could you take a look at Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock and copyedit it? Also, I've got a peer review open at Wikipedia:Peer review/Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock/archive2 if you have any suggestions that you'd like to post. Gary King (talk) 16:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the copyedit. I'm tied up at Adam Smith (check the History! It's madness over there—we are uber-productive :)), but when I get the chance, I will do some more copyediting at GH3. Any chance you might be interested in helping to bring it to FA standards soon? Gary King (talk) 21:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thank You
For all of the wonderfully comprehensive and quality edits to pages of interest to me. Also, you should update the masem.wordpress.com to gaming.masemware.com in your blog info. A great site as well. Hotsauce750 (talk) 21:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 20 | 12 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Please help
Hey Masem. In case you haven't found it already, I have created a new article on all the characters in the Saints Row series, which can be found here. It may be messy and is image-less, so I was wonderin' of you'd like to help out a little with the page? Maybe upload some images, write some stuff down about the characters, edit typos etc. I have not included any references because the only sourced I used for the article was my own knowledge. So perhaps you could get some more detailed info and reference it? I know the article may be a 'stub' and may feel a bit 'unnecassary' at this point of time, but maybe in a little while we could succeed in creating a very decent article? I mean, there's List of characters in the GTA series articles, so why shouldn't the SR series get one too? Thanks again, and I have left a few messages on the actual article itself so that you'll know it's still under construction. Tentimesone (talk) 23:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)Tentimesone
[edit] Locations in the Half-Life series
Per your suggestion on the AfD's, I've created a skeleton draft for the Half-Life locations here. If you want to help me build it, that would be great. -- Sabre (talk) 12:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Awards as evidence of notability for Elements of Fiction
With regard to the discussion you have been participating in at WT:FICT, there is a section, WT:FICT#AFI 100 as an example where it would be grateful if you would make your views known regarding the inclusion of awards in Elements of fiction.--Gavin Collins (talk) 22:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Aperture Wiki, we edit what we must because we can
It really should be a "HL universe" list, given that we've got to throw Portal into the mix. For example, List of Half-Life universe characters. Sceptre (talk) 17:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed, though given the nature of how Portal fits to HL (developers have stated there's connections), it could be "series". As long as it's consistent its not aproblem. --MASEM 17:33, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikicookie
[edit] No
This way works better- Have it so that Saints Row links to the page detailing the series, Saints Row (series) redirects to that page and Saints Row (game) is the new link for the game in itself. It works better, and if you type in 'Grand Theft Auto' then it won't link to the 1997 PC game, instead the series. So it makes more sense to do it my way. Tentimesone (talk) 01:12, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Tentimesone
Now all I need is for somebody like this dude: 147.240.236.9 to turn the new Saints Row series article into a good one. And you can help too, remember that you are writing about the series, and its history etc....
[edit] FYI...
Trying to get a conversation started in a better spot... User talk:72.192.18.169#New_tables_on_Survivor:_Micronesia_and_Survivor:_China. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Some redundancy in GH lists
I was looking through some different GH lists and saw you've started to include a gameplay description each time. I have a feeling we could trim that information frmo the song list (since it's really a song list and not a gameplay article) and instead linke to Guitar Hero (series) - Gameplay. -- TRTX T / C 22:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] VG Guidelines
Hey there. There was a recent discussion on the VG guidelines talk page about the guidelines. Overall, the content of the guidelines has strong consensus. But a few people thought the guidelines had grown cluttered and disorganized, even if their purpose and meaning are rock solid. I put together a new layout at my user page. My goal was to keep the meaning the same, but to improve the clarity and organization of the guidelines.
I've contacted you because I've noticed that you've been around long enough to have taken part in many discussions about these guidelines and probably have the most experience with them. I was hoping you could take a quick look and tell me your gut reaction so far. If there's any areas where you think I'm way off and need to change to be closer to what we have now, or if there's areas where you think I can make further progress. After I've tried to tackle your feedback, I hope to put the proposal to the larger wikiproject.
Take a look when you find a minute. And reply directly at my talk page. Randomran (talk) 22:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for getting back to me. I definitely see an overlap between what I'm doing and guyinblack. I almost contacted him as well, and I definitely will now that you've pointed out that he's working on a related update. But I was more concerned about improving the guidelines for the purpose of using them in discussions (especially AFDs). A lot of people either don't read the guidelines, don't respect them, or miss important information because of how their laid out. Do you think I'm going about a clean-up the right way, or do you think guyinblack can actually serve a better purpose on this front? Randomran (talk) 16:53, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- Thanks for the revisions. They're definitely improvements all around. I noticed that you added the proposed guidelines from WP:Notability (fiction). I haven't had time to follow this proposal. Have you been following this debate closely? Randomran (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- I've decided to watchlist the proposed fiction guideline. But you'd be doing me a favor if you dropped me a message should there be a major discussion milestone, be it a dispute or a vote to accept the proposed guidelines. I'm going to have less free time in the near future, but I'm still interested in making sure there's a sensible outcome on these guidelines. Randomran (talk) 21:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
-
[edit] Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 21 | 19 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 22 | 26 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:54, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Crackdown-dlc.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Crackdown-dlc.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Gh-on-tour-cover.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Gh-on-tour-cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WP:FICT: Additional foonote re article deletion
I have reverted you additional footnote[1] on the subject of deletion, as this issue is already discussed at length in the body of the proposed guideline under the section Dealing with non-notable fictional topics. Perhaps you overlooked this section and perhaps we should discuss this at WT:FICT so any changes you wish to make can best made. --Gavin Collins (talk) 12:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The WPVG Newsletter (June 2008)
| The Wikipedia:WikiProject Video Games Newsletter | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||
[edit] WP:FICT (Works of Fiction)
I have removed your addtional footnote regarding commentaries that you added to the sectionWorks of Fiction, on the grounds that qualifying this section with a footnote invalidates the whole meaning of the sentence.
However I agree with you that commentary and interviews of the author, directors or publishers cannot be classed as a reliable secondary source for the purposes of establishing notability, and so I have taken out the sentence to which the footnote is directed. I don't believe primary sources like DVD commentary have ever been accepted as evidence of notability.
The sentences I have removed are as follows:
Such sources can include creators' commentary and interviews regarding the work or topic, bearing in mind the restrictions if the work is self-published.While DVD commentary and interviews can often provide appropriate development information and some plot analysis, editors should be cautioned that these types of sources, alone, are not sufficient to demonstrate notability, as it fails to meet "significant" coverage.
I believe this to be agreeable to you. I think that DVD commentaries are probably best dealt with by WP:MOVIE in any case. --Gavin Collins (talk) 07:24, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Crackdown.
I'll try to copyedit it soon. · AndonicO Engage. 09:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Okay; I assume you can handle the rest, then? Because I've four other requests to copyedit (...I've really gotten popular recently, no idea why :P). · AndonicO Engage. 21:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 23 | 2 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
