User talk:Miremare

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Miremare, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  Luksuh 00:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Articles for deletion: Liero

Because of the deletion/merge outcome of the article Liero Xtreme that you participated in, several related articles have been nominated for deletion on the same grounds. Please see the discussion.--Snoopydawg 08:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Sabre wulf gba screen.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Sabre wulf gba screen.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. The Sunshine Man 18:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed Miremare 18:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Non-free use disputed for Image:Ultimate Play the Game logo.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Miremare 18:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ultimate article updates

Thanks for letting me know, I might peruse it when I have the time. Cheers. Mr.bonus 18:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categorisation

With regards to your recent edit to Cookie (video game), please read WP:SUBCAT and in particular the first sentence: "In straightforward cases an article should not be in both a category and its subcategory.". Cheers --Pak21 17:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi. WP:SUBCAT states that "When an article is put into a subcategory based on an attribute that is not the first thing most people would think of to categorise it, it should be left in the parent category as well." Based on that I'll revert back to what it was, but if you feel strongly about it suggest removing the "ZX Spectrum-only games" subcat instead (there's a recently unearthed BBC conversion, so it's no longer technically true). Cheers, Miremare 17:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Could you please explain what makes Cookie different from every other game in Category:ZX Spectrum-only games? None of the other games there are also listed in the parent cat. I wouldn't mind if you were doing it for every game there, but doing it for just one game is not going to help the reader. Cheers --Pak21 20:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Further to that, a brief sample of Category:DS-only games finds none that are also listed in Category:Nintendo DS games, and the same goes for Category:GameCube-only games, Category:PlayStation 2-only games, Category:PlayStation 3-only games, Category:Wii-only games and Category:Xbox 360-only games. I'd say that is a very clear consensus for not listing them in their parent category, and as such will remove the listing tomorrow unless you provide a good reason not to. With regards to the BBC port, that's is of course a different question, so please add the verifiable evidence for that. Cheers --Pak21 20:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Not having taken much notice of categories thus far, it would seem that the precedent is there. However WP:SUBCAT clearly states that if the sub-category is not the first category that people would look for it in, then it should be in the parent category too. Personally, I would look for any Spectrum game in the "Spectrum Games" category, and wonder why Cookie (or whatever) wasn't in it. That goes for any format exclusive title too -- I would look for Mario Kart DS in "DS Games", and I believe most other people would too. It seems a little odd to me that these "only" categories exist at all if they're removing games from where people would naturally look for them. A case of over-categorisation. Therefore I believe all these "only" games should indeed also appear in their parent categories as per WP:SUBCAT. But I'm certainly not going to move them all. :) Anyway, I will add something about the BBC version and remove Cookie from "Spectrum-only". Cheers, Miremare 01:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I would like some help convincing User:bean23 that games in the PSN category could also belong to the PS3 only category. He is always removing this category from all PSN games. He uses XBox Live Arcade games as an excuse that all PSN games cannot belong to the PS3 only category. --Stef Nighthawk 19:55, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cookie

Request that you and the other editor discuss this on the Cookie talk page, rather than continually reverting each other's edits. Thanks, --Oscarthecat 17:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Discussion: see above. ;)
Doh, didn't spot that, thanks. --Oscarthecat 18:06, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
No problem. :) Miremare 18:30, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair-use

Hi MireMare. Thanks for sorting out the fair-use rationale on the images of Ultimate titles! I didn't know I needed to do that when I originally uploaded them. As it happens, some of my other screenshots have been removed recently, on the grounds of their non-free status, so it's very helpful to see the sort of information I should be providing. Cheers, --Plumbago 15:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed a lot of images are getting tagged recently by that bot so I thought I'd pre-empt it on the rest of the Ultimate ones. Incidentally, did you know your screenshots made it into print? One of the books I cited on the Ultimate article (Rare: The Ultimate Story) nicked all its screenshots from Wikipedia. You're responsible for about 75% of its pictorial content! Miremare 17:13, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Pentagram_cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Pentagram_cover.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. OsamaK 18:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh... fixed. Note to self: I really ought to stop doing these naughty things. Cheers self, Miremare 21:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bot request

No problem. I'm glad I could be of assistance. :) Cheers S up? 19:35, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Emulation

Hi Miremare. At the risk of asking a legally-dubious question, I was wondering if you'd ever come across a good way to emulate Ultimate's titles? As I mentioned on my talkpage the other day, I did once look into this, but was unable to find a satisfactory solution (getting Ultimate source code seemed to be the problem). Anyway, as a fellow fan of Ultimate titles, I thought that perhaps you'd made some more progress this way that I had. No worries if not. Cheers, --Plumbago 10:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Keep up the good work on the Ultimate pages!

Unfortunately unlike a lot of publishers Rare don't allow their old games to be distributed for emulation purposes, but if you've got the original tapes there are a couple of Spectrum emulators that allow you to load from a tape recorder plugged into your PC's microphone socket. As for which emulators these are I'll have to find out as I can't remember. Personally, I always use "Klive" which is nice and compact and will emulate any Speccy model perfectly, but it doesn't do the loading from tape thing. I'll have a look and let you know. Miremare 11:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Missed one ;-)

Oops. Thanks. Jddphd 05:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

No probs. Keep up the good work. Miremare 05:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Overworld

As a matter of fact, I'm not really sure how to go about these sorts of things either, Miremare. -_- Since it has a Wiktionary entry, I suppose it shouldn't be deleted; it'd probably be best served with a brief definition and link to the Wiktionary entry, in the manner of a disambiguation page. Thanks for taking the time to inform me of the transwiki! Geuiwogbil 23:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Yep, that's more like it. :) Miremare 23:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Glad you like it! Hopefully, someday a ludological journal will eventually publish a historical survey of "Overworlds", and the article can return in a detailed, polished, and sourced state. Someday, someday... Geuiwogbil 23:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up! ;) Geuiwogbil 12:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] redirect

ah yes, my bad. This happens to work because every word in Ultimate Play The Game is capitalized. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 00:34, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Game dates

Hi Miremare. I noticed that you changed the dates of certain of the Ultimate titles over at the Ultimate template. I'm not sure that the new dates are correct though - I looked into this before and found a range of dates, and attempted to work out the correct ones. Anyway, have a look there and see what you think - I know, for instance, that the Rare website's definitely wrong on several of the later titles, but the earlier ones are more difficult to pin down. Cheers, --Plumbago 10:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure World of Spectrum is right on all those dates. Of the sources I used in Ultimate Play The Game, both Andrew Rollins' excellent The ZX Spectrum Book: 1982-199x and Xbox360 Magazine's Rare/Ultimate supplemental book also feature both games in their respective "1983" sections. Judging by the review dates of Feb '84 for Lunar Jetman and as early as Jan '84 for Atic Atac, I think late - probably around Christmas - 1983 is most likely for these two (remember that Ultimate didn't let the mags review the games before release, so there would be a small delay). Rare themselves, however, obviously don't know what they're talking about (Pentagram 1985, Gunfright 1986) ;). It would still be best to find a release date in one of the mags if possible (I'll have a closer look), but I still reckon 1983 is the most likely. Let me know what you think. Cheers, Miremare 17:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
You're probably right - a Christmas release date does sound most likely. Unfortunately, despite me favouring it before, Crash only began publication in early 1984, so isn't ideal on this point. Anyway, on reflection, I'm OK with your changes. Cheers, --Plumbago 17:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ultimate Barnstar

The Ultimate Play The Game Barnstar
Miremare — please accept this Ultimate Play The Game Barnstar in recognition
of your sterling efforts to reinstate and improve Ultimate Play The Game's article,
and those of its many fine 8-bit titles. Be assured that Sabreman would be proud.
--Plumbago 16:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Miremare! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Daniel 04:41, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I fixed the part. There were no felonies issued against him.... Also, the newspapers have retracted many articles as more information has came out and there initial articles were not factual.

[edit] The warnings on User Talk: 121.209.162.193

The warnings on User Talk: 121.209.162.193 are for a prior user of this IP address. To put the matter as politely as I can, I don't want to see them, and I can assure you the person who made the edits isn't seeing them either. So please stop. --121.209.162.193 05:37, 14 July 2007 (UTC) [i.e. it probably won't be me in a few hours]


That's all fine and good - but there are 254 * 254 IPs in this subscriber block - I have never had the same one twice, but this isn't the first time I have gotten someone else's warnings. Since they are stale and somewhat offensive, I prefer to get rid of them as a courtesy to the next user of the IP.


I think you are missing the point entirely, have a look at some stuff on IP address allocation to see what I am on about. I am sick of getting warnings for other users For this IP address block you are more often than not (in my case 100% of the time) just offending the wrong person. The Badger editor is not seeing this - he or she may not even be at his computer. These messages are an impediment to users who just want to look up an article, as I did when I saw all this crap. If I have to stamp them out one Talk page at a time, that's what I will do. I am sick of them. It does not matter that the only edits were Badger edits. Everyone who logs on with the IP address sees them - and often you get a message notice, even when you are just reading Wikipedia not editing it. If you need to keep records, or even block the all IPs from editing without registering altogether (which would be the smartest move) that is fine - just do it somewhere where it does not keep telling me I have messages. Thank you.

How can I tell if someone is a mod?Anti-75 07:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Woburn Collegiate Institute

I reverted your revert of 74.116.219.80. If you look at the content this user removed, it is quite libelous/defamatory and the user who added it has been blocked previously for adding the exact same material. You can see more info about this on User talk:74.116.1.178. Thanks, - auburnpilot talk 06:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Greg Gall (football fan)

I removed the speedy-delete tag on this article. See the article's discussion page and feel free to add your comments. Truthanado 20:19, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No Problem

Glad to help. :) -WarthogDemon 23:20, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stub types

Don't know if you're watching it, but I left you a message at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/2007/July#New_videogame_subtypes. Also, do you have any opinion on the other proposals? ~ JohnnyMrNinja {talk} 07:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply to your note about Marvel Ultimate Alliance

I looked at the page, and the voice actors list seems fine now. RobJ1981 18:27, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, from the looks of it: the list is only playable characters and the main villains. It's a bit long still. The whole article in general needs a ton of work still: the plot, character list and so on. While the game features alot of characters, I'm not so sure that whole list is needed. I believe it use to be a lot worse, but it could use some condensing. I think I will probably play the game again, and take notes about the characters. I've been meaning to play the game anyway, as I enjoyed it the first times I played it a while ago. RobJ1981 22:03, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thx

Thank you for telling me about that, and for the fanfare on the article. It was very long and needed severe trimming but I think that after I edited it, someone is going to come along an argue about what should be in it. =) Mithmaleki 20:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering why you were trimming the character voice list but then decided that it is probably too long as it is...If you know anything about video game voice over people, can you trim the article to anyone of notability and then link to imdb's "Ultimate Alliance" page?
Well I just took out the list and posted it in the talk page saying that someone should establish notability on a couple of voice actors before editing only a couple back in. I would have put IMDB in the article but im an extreme noob when it comes to adding links.

[edit] Computer game stubs

Category:Computer game stubs - What do you think? ~ JohnnyMrNinja 07:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that seems fine. A template for Amiga/Atari ST game stubs wouldn't go amiss though. Miremare 14:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I should have put money on it! While I didn't expect the Atari ST, I had a pretty strong hunch that Amiga would be in your reply. I even searched for a free version of the Amiga logo to no avail, closest I could find was Image:The Unarchiver amiga.png. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 17:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
You knew that? Either I'm too predictable or you can read minds! That free Amiga logo would probably be too small to recognise once it's scaled down in a stub template though. My inital idea when I suggested it was one of the blue 3.5" floppy disks that the Amiga and ST used (presumably there would be no problem getting a free image of that), at least until more suitable Amiga and ST specific images can be found. BTW: I'm never sure which talk page to post replies on, so I'll post here to make sure you see it. :) Cheers, Miremare 18:17, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps or are to your liking? Also, would you mind making the template(s), as I'm not quite sure if you're talking about two separate templates or one that's Amiga/Atari ST (perhaps a "16-bit computer" template?) Also, I know absolutely nothing about these computers. If you were to make it, I would me more than happy to transclude it everywhere. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 19:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
OK, Template:Amiga-game-stub and Template:Atari ST-game-stub. I just copied the code you'd used and changed the relevant bits. Hopefully one of us, or someone else, will find more suitable system specific images than the floppy disk at some point, but I think they'll do for now. Miremare 19:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
It's like ping-pong. I moved {{Atari ST-game-stub}} to {{AtariST-game-stub}} , and changed the numbers in the category (so they show up after MS-DOS but before 8-bit). But those are some nice templates you made. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 22:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't realise I'd got the ST title wrong, or that I had to change those numbers. I've never made a template before, only edited them. I've a feeling that seperate 8-bit templates might be needed at some point for the likes of the ZX Spectrum and Commodore 64, considering the immense number of games released on those systems, and the tendency of those games towards stub-dom on Wikipedia. Although I don't really want to overcomplicate things at this early stage of the stub overhaul. Miremare 22:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
No problem, the numbers are only something I do so that the templates show up in a certain order (besides alphabetical). I don't think there's really anyone besides me that does any major video game stub sorting. I figured we'll keep the 8-bit for now (as many of the games were cross-platform back then) until the category gets so huge we have to break off into an 8-bit subcat. I didn't want to overwhelm anyone with a ton of templates in the same category. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 23:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Also, if you are inclined to put the templates up (which it seems you are already doing) it might not hurt to check if {{cvgproj}} is on the talk page, as a lot of computer games seem to be missing it. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 23:53, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smile

Connell66 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

[edit] Re: Update

Thanks for the quick notification! Goodness, that's just crazy. Geuiwogbil 23:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Funeral for a Friend

No problem, and I'm sorry I didn't explain or anything in the edit summary. GoodnightmushTalk 02:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Newmessage TfD

Considering the suggestion given here, I notified Dalejenkins. —AldeBaer 07:46, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Knight Lore

It's a matter of the articles having nothing to show that they are of high importance. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:33, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Once I see something that'll show that it's high importance, I won't oppose. But you have to have more than your observation - there has to be reliable sources that give a reason why it should be considered of high importance. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:43, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Being bold is suggested. I was being bold in looking at the article, seeing nothing that explains why it's high importance, and making the judgment. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Please add sources to your images. Thank you. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:05, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

We still need a source to show that the image is official. Also, yes, it'd be better to do that. But it takes very little time to do it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Ainmay Agepay

The point is for it to be humorous, not a real article!  Jonjonbt 19:41, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, then! I'll move it to my user space!  Jonjonbt 19:44, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ivirtua redirect to IVIRTUA

I notice that you've been adding a {{db-web}} tag to Ivirtua which redirects to the article IVIRTUA. Even though IVIRTUA is tagged with the same tag, the redirect does not qualify for speedy deletion under the same criteria. It is a redirect, not an article, so it can not qualify for speedy deletion under an article criteria. Most likely, if an administrator deletes IVIRTUA, they will check what links to that article before deleting it and catch the redirect as well. If the redirect is overlooked, it can simply be tagged with {{db-redirnone}} once IVIRTUA is deleted. --Nick—Contact/Contribs 20:43, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 31 December

I have a weird feeling that now that they have their field added you won't get a reply. I want to be wrong, but I won't be holding my breath. - X201 19:17, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

You don't happen to know the answer yourself do you? I have to admit to still being a bit confused about that whole hCalender thing... Miremare 19:26, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
The person who added the edit protected stuff to the template seems to be saying on the talk page that it's the start of the solution, although after reading a different thread to do with hCalendar it appears to be a way of solving it that that won't be available until someone solves another problem. After reading the info that I could find it looks like the plan is to pick the dates out via a bot using the hcalendar item that they added BUT that will require the running of a separate bot to convert the release dates in all CVG articles into a form that uses their new date format. (hang on it gets worse) This discussion [1] makes it look like they haven't figured out a way to do that yet :-)
The hCalendar thing appears to be a way of tagging certain info in wikippedia so that external programs can retrieve that data and know that they have the field they wanted. It's a way of marking a release date as a release date so that it knows how to distinguish a release date from any other date that might be in the article. That's how I read it at the third attempt. They really need to un-techy their project page, - X201 21:58, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Oh great, they don't even know how to do what they're doing!? At least I kind of understand it now, but it doesn't seem worth worrying about - or hanging about for - to me. If they get something sorted out at whatever point in the future then that's all well and good, but no help now. There's no point waiting indefinitely, so I've re-opened the request for a bot to take care of it. Thanks for letting me know! Miremare 23:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Canvassing

I understand. Thanks for making that clearer. GlassCobra 23:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re:EditConflict

Yeah, I think it was just an edit conflict; it was probably one of those awkward, "hidden edit conflict" types. — Deckiller 01:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spells in Harry potter

It is currently under a deletion review. Therequiembellishere 17:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: AfD

Yeha, I did notice, but I hardly believed you had evil intent ;) David Fuchs (talk) 01:14, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] misuse of "listcruft"

The term "listcruft" which you have used to justify edits to several Ace Combat pages does not apply to lists of aircraft contained within those articles. The concept of a listcruft refers to a standalone list created solely for listing specific objects. The lists of aircraft situated within the articles do not fulfill any of the 8 conditions given in WP:LISTCRUFT. Please re-read the article and be sure to be familiar with the terms therein before you attempt to use that as a reason for edits. IdoAlphaOmega 04:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't necessarily agree that "listcruft" cannot refer to lists within articles, as WP:LISTCRUFT does not appear to exclude this, and it would seem illogical to me to do so. A list is a list, as the first sentence of the essay seems to say. However, if you consider my terminology to be incorrect please accept my apologies, and consider "listcruft" to simply mean "cruft", though I feel I have to stand by my reasoning for removing the lists in question. Cheers, Miremare 18:56, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Starlord.jpg

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Miremare 04:04, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wiki

I have an Ace Combat Wiki, you could join if you like: http://editthis.info/ace_combat_wiki/Main_Page

Thanks Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 21:25, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Cheers, I'll give it a look. Miremare 18:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My edits

Look, there is nothing wrong with my edits! if you think my edits are vandalism which are not then there's something wrong with you. I do not expand images no bigger than 300px and its just a stupid infobox anyway.

by the way, i am not blind just in case your wondering and bigger images are better because you can see them more.

now please will you stop reverting my edits and let me get on. thx. happy editing! 82.33.160.8 00:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Replied on user's talk page Miremare 17:03, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] (Console)-only categories

Hi! I absolutely agree with your thoughts on (Console)-only categories. If they are necessary, their entries should be in both (Console)-only and (Console) - as a user, this confused me greatly. Also, current usage is inconsistent - there does not seem to be a "Sega Megadrive-only" or "TurboGrafx 16-only" category, but there is for newer consoles and the ZX Spectrum. Also, DS-only games seems to have been speedily deleted. Shame there seemed no real consensus before, perhaps the issue should be reopened... Xmoogle 00:17, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re: Rushdie

The article already specifies the authors' origins, but in some instances (J M Coetzee for example), two countries are listed -- one for their origin, and one for their current residence/citizenship status. Because Rushdie is Indian born (at a time in which India was owned by the UK, by the way), and India plays such a large part in his writing and for his Booker Prize winning work, I believe it's important to list India as his country of origin. His article also lists him as British-Indian; not just British. However, if you wish to list the UK in addition, I would have no qualms with that. Take care, María (críticame) 19:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. If you make this change for Rushdie, than what is listed for numerous other individuals is going to be affected, since they do list the country of origin. Kiran Desai, for example, lives in the US as a permanent resident, but she is originally from India; only India is listed on the Booker Prize article. Rushie is an Indian born citizen of the UK; if you only list the UK, then it would be a misrepresentation. Perhaps you should take it to the talk page if you are still concerned. María (críticame) 19:19, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Furthermore, I have to point out your mistaken belief that Rushdie's being knighted proves that he is only (or mainly) British; people in the dependent territories and colonies (such as India) are eligible for knighthood. It rests upon their services to the nation. Several Americans have been knighted, for example, but they're still Americans. ;) María (críticame) 19:31, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
No, I am not disputing his British citizenship, but he is an Indian born British author; both may be listed at the Booker Prize article, as has been done with various other winners, if you wish. To exclude India, however, and list him solely as British would be incorrect. María (críticame) 19:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quick note on SC strategy articles

Sorry to continue this on your talk page, but there was something I had to mention. Most strategy articles are written by random fans and are of no importance, you're right. There's a distinction that arises when the articles are actually written by professional players, though (for which the Mondragon/ToT/MYM example I refer to qualifies). Certainly nobody would care if some random chess player said something about chess; statements or articles by, say, Karpov, though, are significantly more notable. taion 22:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ludography

A bit disappointed, but as the word doesn't appear to crop up in any online dictionaries I guess you're right. (I wonder why "videography" caught on but "ludography" didn't? The latter has 10,800 google hits to the former's 6 million.) I first started using the word years ago, when I saw Steve Jackson Games using it. I didn't realise the usage wasn't that widespread. Anyway, no problems, Marasmusine 07:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Driver Kate Parkhurst

The episode guide in question appears to be no longer online, as a thorough Google search has failed to turn it up. The only webpages that give the Series 4 Bob the real name Kate are fanfiction. As that's unlikely to impress the purists I've removed the sentence, although I'm still convinced she is a Kate and that only the most po-faced spoilsport would call "it would seem reasonable to assume", supported by the fact that characters recur across the series, OR. No offence to yourself meant. Thanks, Jess Cully 23:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Fifa2001cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Fifa2001cover.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:06, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Founding of the BBC and GE involvement

Methinks that it's General Electric Company Ltd — the original British Broadcasting Company office was on the fifth floor of the G.E. building in London [2] as Hugo Hirst founder of the British G.E. was on that first committee [3] — all this is difficult to establish as most online refs just quote Wikipedia !

If you want to know more, you'll have to read a book — try the first volume [4] of Beeb history by Asa Briggs [5] — 25 quid, I'm afraid, but free at your local library. For a quick crash course on early hisory then look here [6] from 1922 onwards.

Enough to be going on with ? .... Zir 11:06, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Cheers, that clears up the confusion! Miremare 15:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
It's been like opening a can of worms — the more I've learned, the more confused I've become...Zir 14:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning User Talk for User:207.74.196.20

I know this seems like a strange subject to bring up, but I'm now dealing with this IP address on the Sonic News Network and all its edits seem to have been constructive, so, of course, I was curious about the huge list of warnings and blocks on the talk page here. Then I got looking up some of the things the warnings were for, and saw several that I didn't understand at all. For example, I don't see how this was vandalism at all. So I guess I'm just trying to figure out what happend and if I should be worried now. Any info you have on what really went on would be great.FerralMoonrender (MyTalk • MyContribs • EmailMe) 21:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. You're right there was no vandalism in that edit, just as there was no vandalism in the majority of the user's edits. However he has persisted in comprehensively removing maintenance templates (such as {{mergeto}}, {{mergefrom}}, {{plot}}, {{trivia}}, {{fact}}) from articles. Obviously removing these templates is fine if they no longer apply, or if something has been done to address the concerns they raise, but this was never the case. I attempted to contact the user a number of times (as you see from the talk page) to try to persuade him not to do this, but to no avail. In fact, even when returning to editing after a block he would go straight back to doing exactly the same thing. It is a pity, as he made constructive edits too, but what can be done when he refuses either to talk or stop doing it? So as for your question on whether you should be worried about him - no. Unless he edits articles containing maintenance templates, in which case - yes! Hope that helps, Miremare 22:50, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for clearing that up for me. By the way, that was one of the edits that he was warned about vandalism for, which is one of the reasons I was so confused. Half his/their (since that IP is the Detroit Public Library) edits that were reverted seemed fine to me. FerralMoonrender (MyTalk • MyContribs • EmailMe) 23:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hedgehog 8-bit

I had the discussion with the reverter. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:21, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:IllusiveOne

User:IllusiveOne (talk · contribs) used almost the exact same format to open Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Player versus player in World of Warcraft as you did with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RuneScape combat. Inspiring anonymous users to register and take action according to the same format as you did is a good thing, as we can always use more active users.

I personally dislike to violate WP:BITE, but someone needs to tell this user that opening up controversial AfDs as a WP:SPA account is not good for the chance of success of such a discussion. Note that with "success" I mean "having a proper discussion".

Judging by the format this user opened up his or her AfD, he or she is inspired by your previous deletion debate, and therefore would probably take a note from you more seriously. I would like you to consider explaining WP:SPA to that user. It would not be the first time a newly registered user left because of people judging the person instead of the argument.

Thanks in advance, User:Krator (t c) 18:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] November 2007 issue of Games Master (GM191) - Knight Lore featured in 'we love old games'.

Hello, noting your interest in Ultimate games I thought you might like to know that Knight Lore was one of a handful of games in this month's GM. The piece is little more than a paragraph but the piece is about isometric perspective in games. I quote:

"If the other games on this page were charming little experimentations, then Ultimate's Knight Lore is the grade-A VIP. The third in the Sabreman series, this slightly cryptic puzzle/platform adventure defined isometricism in the same way Super Mario 64 defined 3D: it was big, brilliant and brazenly copied by an entire seventh of the global population (including, inevitably, Ultimate themselves). Playing it today, it's remarkably fresh for a blip-blap-speaking Speccy game, with a design that wriggles like an eel and a werewolf transformation that tops Twilight Princess' in an effortless eight frames."

That's the piece in its entirity. Not sure if it's acceptable for it to remain here but at least you can see what's been said. If yourself (or another interested party) needs more information in order to cite the magazine I'd be happy to supply whatever's needed. Cheers now. Someone another 15:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. That they said it "defined isometricism in the same way Super Mario 64 defined 3D" is certainly worth including in the Knight Lore article, I'll add it in. Don't hesitate to tell me about any other mentions of Ultimate games you see! Cheers, Miremare 16:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I would appreciate your help.

Seeing your success in the RuneScape AfD articles, I feel you are the appropriate one to ask.

I would like to request for your help in these articles.

Someone has merged them without discussion (which probably are aware the previous one failed because they were nominated together), and I would like for you to participate in this AfD. Thanks. IAmSasori 13:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Waxworks

No problems. I just saw the links and listified them as a general piece of tidying up. Didn't really check as to whether they were that relevant or not :-) Cheers --Pak21 16:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sabre wulf box.jpg

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:35, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sabre wulf gba screen.gif

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

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

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GTA Merges

Well, I figure that maybe the reviews and stuff could be merged in. Certainly the box set article needs to be removed, it's just a matter of what information, if any, we transcribe first. mattbuck 17:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know, all the CDs were released as a single box set, and that was the extent of it. mattbuck 18:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Lunar jetman trailer.gif

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I would appreciate your help, again.

Thank you for your help in the Warcraft AfDs before. The only one that barely survived back then was the race articles. That sockpuppet Melsaran was quite troublesome wasn't he?

Either way, I would appreciate it if I could get your help again, especially in Alliance (Warcraft) and Horde (Warcraft). Seeing as how you've added them to lists before, you probably would already know which ones need attention. Thanks again in advance. IAmSasori 15:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Knight Lore date

Sorry it took me a week to get back to you on this. The Knight Lore (FDS) date of 1986-12-19 can be found in a variety of places; most easily on GameFAQs [7], but rest assured the date is also attested in contemporary Japanese game catalogues of the era. --Ecksemmess 22:07, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

It should be listed in several of Famitsu's comprehensive gaming catalogues, and probably had some coverage in the regular Famitsu magazine when it first came out. I'm afraid I can't give you details beyond that -- it's a bit hard to keep track of all this when one doesn't know any Japanese! Good luck tracking down more info, though. --Ecksemmess 03:11, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit of Micronet800 page

Hi - Shades did start on Micronet800.. I have no physical proof, but I worked at the company at the time. Hope that helps. Cheers -- Rudythebear (talk) 19:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I've reverted the removal. I'll look for a reference, though I couldn't find one before. Cheers, Miremare 19:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
What about http://games.world.co.uk/shades/inshades/history/Mags.htm - (I think I have org. artwork for the image at the bottom of that page!) Rudythebear
Yes, that'll do fine - I've added it to the article. May I ask, as you worked on Micronet, do you have any sources that could be useful (like the printed page currently on the article) that you would be willing to upload? Miremare 21:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bot

Hello! I`ll try to fix that error. Thank you for warning me about that edit. Regards, Muro de Aguas (write me) 18:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Cheers, Miremare 19:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Urban Rivals

Can you check the article and see what you think about the references I added. Those are all, if you think those are too weak we can go ahead and put the article back up for deletion. Let me know your thoughts that was all I could find as far as seemingly solid references. I don't have this page watched but I do the urban rivals article, so you can post your thoughts in the talk page. --businessman332211 (talk) 02:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 100 AfDs Completed.

According to the tally on my userpage, I appear to have started and completed 100 Articles for Deletion with a 9 out of 10 ratio of deletion. It seems that my technique has improved over the time, and I had your RuneScape AfD as inspiration to eliminate a huge amount of cruft. All of the Warcruft have apparently been wiped out, so I believe I may be done with it for now and should move to something else.

How well do you think I have done, and am I approaching this correctly? IAmSasori (talk) 22:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I would say you are approaching it correctly. One suggestion I'd make is not to shy away from bundling articles together in an AfD when appropriate - it saves time and effort and shouldn't prove a problem for anyone if the articles are related and fail in the same way. Hopefully the result of all your activity will be better, more encyclopedic coverage of Warcraft within the constraints of policy. This seems to have been the case with Runescape - at least while the main article remains quite stable (and was always fine anyway), some of the regular editors now seem to accept that the previous Runescape-related articles weren't appropriate, judging by some of the more recent talk page comments. Anyway, yeah, good job. there's so much non-notable completely in-universe stuff on Wikipedia that we sorely need editors who are intent on keeping it under control. Miremare 02:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Frank West (Dead Rising)

I noticed your previous defense of the Frank West article, and it needs your help again. TTN and his friends are now attempting to get it merged, even though consensus for a keep was reached on this once before. They have been doing this to alot of articles, or so my research has turned up. The discussion is occuring at the Dead Rising talk page. Smile Lee (talk) 17:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

P.S. He, TTN, has been having an ArbCom located here. Smile Lee (talk) 17:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure I'd be able to contribute much - to begin with in that AfD I was in favour of deleting the article, though was persuaded otherwise by sources that, in my view, possibly proved the article's notability, though I remained a little unsure. It was basically a "when in doubt, keep" kind of thing. But of course notability doesn't mean that there has to be a seperate article, and I think it's possible that a merge, gathering all the info in one place, could be to the benefit of the subject as a whole. Cheers, Miremare 18:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Colt (Supernatural) (2nd nomination)

I am giving you this message because you participated in the AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Colt (Supernatural). Due to a lack of participants in the discussion I have relisted it here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Colt (Supernatural) (2nd nomination). You are welcome to participate. 1 != 2 20:19, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Screenshots

Hi Miremare. Just to say that I've received a whole load of screenshot deletion notices for various Ultimate screenshots that I've uploaded. What seems to have happened is that galleries of screenshots (which have fallen out of favour) have been deleted, causing the component non-free images to lose a retention criterion, i.e. the need to be used on at least one page. Anyway, I can't spend time sorting this out today, but I thought I'd give you a heads-up just in case. The articles affected today appear to be Underwurlde and Entombed. Cheers, --Plumbago (talk) 09:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE The Colt

Fair enough (as it was a controversial AfD, I probably should have provided a rationale in closing). Although I personally felt the Delete arguments were stronger, and would have !voted Delete had I participated in the AfD, it was nonetheless the case that the Keep !voters put up valid arguments against deletion (although I did discount the comments of User:Smumdax who clearly doesn't understand the notability guidelines as they presently stand), and I didn't see an outright consensus for deletion. In any AfD, the default result is a Keep unless there is a clear and unequivocal consensus to delete. I considered a merge and redirect as an alternative outcome, and indeed you are free to perform a merge yourself (as merges don't require an AfD).

Since the outcome was a No consensus, not a Keep, this does not preclude re-nomination at any time (although I don't think that another re-listing would produce a stronger consensus). Alternatively, you could take it to WP:DRV (where I will explain my close if needed, but won't !vote on the DRV). WaltonOne 18:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FIFA 08

Image:Civility barnstar.png Civility Award
When other editors didn't agree with your changes to FIFA 08, you calmly discussed it with them, referencing appropriate policies and guidelines along the way. Many editors would probably have taken disagreement as a personal attack and start edit warring, but you kept a cool head in the face of opposition. Good job! NF24(radio me!) 01:23, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


I've been watching this dispute from the sidelines. I think that perhaps a Request for comment is in order if the dispute continues. NF24(radio me!) 01:23, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ultimate Race Pro

Hello. Here is the source for that. Cheers, D@rk talk 20:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

My answer is on my talk page. I was definitely mistaken about that. I've reverted my edit. D@rk talk 12:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nav template stuff

Aeron has now started an ANI thread about me reverting his style removals at WP:ANI#Ned Scott's mass-undos on Navigational templates.. If you'd like to leave any comments regarding the situation please do. If not, no worries. -- Ned Scott 08:02, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Castlevania: Curse of Darkness Soundtrack Sampler

Should definitely be merged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EliasAlucard (talk • contribs) 08:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jetboy port discussion

[edit] Port of Jetpac

Can you write me, why You deleted info about Jetboy from Jetpac page...? This is an Atari XL/XE free port (not commercial Atari ST version), so - what is the problem...?--Sikor soft (talk) 09:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Being an unofficial remake, Jetboy is a copyright violation unless permission from Rare was obtained, and such permission was not indicated, and is very unlikely to have been given. For that reason, the link to the Jetboy website cannot remain on the page as per this part of Wikipedia's policy on copyrights. I removed the rest of the paragraph on Jetboy as there have been many such conversions/clones of Jetpac and this one doesn't really explain why it's notable enough for a mention, let alone an entire paragraph and screenshot - as part of Wikipedia's policy of neutral point of view, things should be given the weight they deserve and no more. The guidelines for video game articles also discourage the inclusion of homebrew remakes as mostly promotional in nature, which is how the paragraph on Jetboy appears. Cheers, Miremare 12:55, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Video games notable for negative reception

An article that you have been involved in editing, Video games notable for negative reception, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Video games notable for negative reception (2nd nomination). Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Valtoras (talk) 17:59, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Fifa2005cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Fifa2005cover.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) 12:39, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Inactivity

I'm just letting you know that I am taking a long break after a year of hard work, including from Wikipedia. Unfortunately, I won't be able to create any new AfDs for quite a long time, but I hope that you will be able to continue the great work in cleansing the sourceless cruft just like you did in RuneScape and such. Thanks for the inspiration, and good luck with your goals. IAmSasori (talk) 17:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to have to butt in here to say that an attitude that makes one speak of "cleansing" the work of other people is probably going to do more harm than good in a collaborative environment, even if removing that work is justified. :( --Kizor 14:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, I haven't taken part in any AfDs in a long time now, and I don't intend to... too much hassle. Maybe you've got a point about the wording there Kizor, though I'm sure there was no particular inflammatory intent behind it. But removing other people's work is never going to win you many friends whatever terms you use to describe it. Miremare 06:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion of Greg Gall (football fan)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Greg Gall (football fan), 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 should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? KenWalker | Talk 02:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Actuasoccer3.jpg}

Thank you for uploading Image:Actuasoccer3.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

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

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 15:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Getting extra input

Do you think you could possibly PM the people who you consider to be "active contributors" to make the discussions a bit more legitimate? - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not really sure who is, as I'm not too active myself at the moment. Maybe asking for regular contributions to the Negative Reception page at WT:VG would be the best way. Miremare 18:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

thanks 4 the heads up, miremare, but i'm very careful not to break 3RR, as i time my reverts for maximum efficiency. please participate in the discussions on said page, and you'll be able to see both sides of the story, thank you. I am a jedi (talk) 23:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE:Creative Assembly

The source is here and official CA response.--SkyWalker (talk) 04:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC)