User talk:MrKIA11/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Percy Andrews

Hi. I've disambiguated his place of birth, which I've done with my new book. Thanks, -- Mattythewhite (talk) 22:34, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Andy Hill

Not possible, I'm afraid. My reference only said "Maltby", without any mention of whether it was the one in North Yorkshire, the one in South Yorkshire or the one in Lincolnshire. If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say it was probably the one in South Yorkshire, but I can't be sure. – PeeJay 08:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Esterel Studio

Thanks for the disambig on RTL - was well beyond me! --AndrewHowse 14:40, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Assassin's Creed

I deleted the gamepro link because it was added by a single purpose account who added gamepro to dozens of articles. I deleted the other one as it appeared the article was only maintaining official external links and this wasn't one and it was added by an IP only today. Who again seems to be marketing only gameanyone links to a few articles.[1]--Crossmr (talk) 00:12, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia Cleaner documentation

Hi,

Thanks for using Wikipedia Cleaner.

  • Recommendation 1: Just to be sure I understand, you mean being able to replace links to redirects by links to the final page, eventually with a button to replace all links in one action ? That should be easy, I can add it in a future release.
  • Recommendation 2: I am already making a summary of changes here (very short and not always complete). On the 3 last versions, I really focused on performance, the last visible changes were in 0.49 but it was small (signature button for adding comments to talk pages) and in 0.47 (adding local comments associated with pages).

--NicoV (talk) 22:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

English version done for summary of changes. Feel free to fix my English ;) --NicoV (talk) 22:58, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

List of PlayStation Portable Gamesharing games

Any games that I add to the list, I have either personally played or I found an article on IGN or GameSpot saying it has gamesharing. Of these three games, I have specific, personal knowledge verifying that they have gamesharing. As far as DTM Race Driver 3 Challenge is concerned, it is not the same game as TOCA. I have played it personally and can attest. It may have the exact same content as one of the other TOCA games but since it was released under a different name, I think it also belongs on the list. I can send you a screenshot of the game or something if you need more proof. Transce080 (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's what I'm thinking about the image: maybe only a single region of the game has gamesharing, like how Twisted Metal only has it in the European version? I assume the version my friend had was the USA version but I saw the gamesharing feature with my own two eyes. If we find out a specific version doesn't have gamesharing, we can always edit the entry later. The DTM game, I believe, was only released in Europe. It could be the case where the game has two different names depending on the region. However, I still think both names should be on the list. Screenshots: 1, 2. Transce080 (talk) 00:26, 6 January 2008 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Transce080 (talk • contribs) 00:24, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay I think I have this figured out now. TOCA Race Driver 3 was released under 3 titles depending on region, the former title (USA), DTM Race Driver 3: Challenge (EUR), and V8 Supercars 3: Shootout (AUS). While these games all seem to share virtually the same content, they are still sold under 3 separate names so I still think they deserve 3 separate listings in the Gamesharing game list. I'm going to re-add V8 Supercars 3: Shootout to the list. --Transce080 (talk) 02:19, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

On the reformatting of the list, I like the new look of the table but I don't agree on the choice of columns. Please see the discussion page and let me know what you think on the subject. --Transce080 (talk) 05:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

SineBot

User:SineBot#Opting out User:Krator (t c) 23:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

np. I did it a while ago myself after I became too annoyed :) User:Krator (t c) 23:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Change to Template:Archive box

I reverted your changes to Template:Archive box as you altered the format of the box rather drastically. With the template being in wide use, I would recommend that you discuss any changes to the template on the Talk page to gain consensus before you make the change. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 17:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Re your message: No problem. I'm a bit surprised somebody hasn't come up with a solution yet. You might try asking over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Templates to see if somebody there has any ideas. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 17:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Archives

I didn't know that, what was it then? That strikes me as a bit odd. Best, Keilanatalk 22:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Itchy trigger apology

Sorry. Carry on. Ahem... --Moni3 (talk) 19:47, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

RE: Archive box

I didn't put one in so I am afraid I don't know if I can help you there. // F9T 20:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

No, thats fine // F9T 20:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Archive box

Re: width parameter. That's a good question! I have not even tried so I do not know if there is a satisfactory answer for you. I am at work now so don';t have the time to play with it and see what's what there. Will try later. -- Alexf(Talk/Contribs) 20:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

My Sandbox

I did not even know it was there! If there is anything I can help you with, feel free to contact me. Tiddly-Tom 07:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Changing unambiguous links?

Howdy -- sorry to bother again, but I wonder if you have an opinion on Wikipedia:Redirect#Do not change links to redirects that are not broken? The reason I ask is that on your recent edit to Cullinet you did fix an ambiguous link I'd marked recently (thanks!), but at the same time you also changed 10 other nonambiguous ones, by adding pipes to their (currently) canonical names). This seems to be a lot of work to no apparent benefit, and does seem to go against the above section.

On the bright side, your changes to the CICS link did alert me to an ill-advised rename by another editor...:-). But that actually points up one of the reason why adding pipes like this can often be a futile exercise, as articles are named and renamed and denamed... . Cheers,NapoliRoma (talk) 17:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Blanking pages

Please do not blank pages, as you did to User:Octoferret. It is considedrd vandalism. Thank you. --Gp75motorsports REV LIMITER 19:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, okay. I'm a recent changes patroller, so I can't take any chances. Apology accepted, but remember to put in a summary next time. --Gp75motorsports REV LIMITER 19:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

"archivelist is being removed"

I see you adjusted User talk:DMacks and User talk:DMacks/Archive 1 with this edit summary. What exactly is changing where? Especially on the latter page, the effect was to remove the list-of-archives box entirely. DMacks (talk) 21:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC) [will continue this on my talk page]. DMacks (talk) 21:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Archive box changes

I am sure your efforts to mass-update archive box usages are with the best of intentions, but please do not do this in the User or User_talk namespace without the permission of the user first. Your change to my page not only eliminated the width parameter which I had explicitly used to make the box wide enough for one line, but it also for some reason changed by dates to read "November 21, '06" which is a very strange style. I saw your comment on your own archive template about why you believe the width parameter is useless, but I disagree -- not all widths are simply determined by content. When the box is meant to sit off to the side of the flow of a page, the layout designer may have a very good reason for setting a fixed width to the box. white-space:nowrap is not an alternative for this, because it still may be desirable for the content to wrap. -- Renesis (talk) 17:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Please STOP now to explain your justification for altering the appearance of so many user pages. -- Renesis (talk) 17:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the explanation. I am just worried because (like mine) it seems a lot of users have intentionally made the box wide enough to fit date ranges on one line, which it is not wide enough for by default. Example: [2] -- Renesis (talk) 18:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
It must be because I am on a Mac, or maybe because of my user stylesheet, but in that example that I showed you the year now wraps when it didn't before. The fonts on a Mac are by default a little wider. -- Renesis (talk) 18:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Uh, thanks for changing my archive name spaces. I probably wouldn't have bothered with it, but it does look better! Ameriquedialectics 19:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I probably just copied and pasted the box into my talk page; if you have an improvement to the code that doesn't substantially alter the look and functionality of the box on my talk page, feel free to have at it, I guess. --Maxamegalon2000 19:44, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Archive box changes - Is there actually consensus?

Like Renesis said, Im pretty sure you did change the archive boxes with the best of intentions. However, i also have to agree with [Collectonian] that i find this sudden chance without consensus intrusive, and to a degree, quite annoying. Correct me if i am wrong, but from the looks of it just two persons were involved into the entire process of editing and replacing the archive box code, with no input from any other person. Also, there was nigh chance someone could actually post any input, as the comments were posted on the template pages yesterday. How big is the chance someone reads the comments for a template every day to give feedback to a change? I estimate that chance to be near nill.

Seconds, i don't exactly agree with the sudden elimination of the Width parameter(And possibly other parameters). It was there some people could control how large or small their archivebox would be. Personally i set mine to create the smallest box as possible, but since it was eliminated the box is suddenly placing the different archives next to each other, which looks (In my opinion) quite ugly. I have force reverted it back, so if you want to see how it looked, you will have to go 1 version of my talk page back. As a little sidenote: Why did you just change this everywhere without asking? The people who set that parameter probally set it for a reason, and i tell you, the sudden change was not exactly a pleasant surprise.

Last, was this entire change actually needed? Sorry if i sound rude but... Standardizing an archive box doesn't actual strike me as being usefully. As long as you can see its an archive box, it should be one. After all, we have 10's of different shades of blue, and still call it blue. Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 21:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Editing and moving others' pages

I strongly urge you to desist. It is by no means your decision to make a change to another's userpage, much less moving people's archives. seresin || wasn't he just...? 23:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Archive box changes

Along with everyone else I notice you're changing a lot of archive boxes, usually eliminating the "small" parameter. That parameter makes the box tighter around the elements contained, makes the icon slightly smaller, and also makes the box orange, which for talk pages goes with other talk page banners, boxes, and notices. Basically it's a more efficient use of space and goes better visually with everything on talk pages. If you have some reason for doing this aside from your own personal preference please let me know, cause your edit summaries haven't said anything to that effect. Thanks. Equazcion •✗/C • 23:25, 23 Jan 2008 (UTC)

PS: My comments are pertaining to article talk space. For userspace you really shouldn't be doing this at all, for any reason. Equazcion •✗/C • 23:45, 23 Jan 2008 (UTC)

As for the color, the contents box is not orange, and that does not seem to be a problem. So in your opinion it goes with the other boxes, but I think it looks best to stop the orange at the top of the TOC and be gray from there down. Also, I never realized that space use was a problem on talk pages, besides the fact that the box only becomes slightly longer. It also seems to me that it would be nice to actually be able to easily read what the text says. MrKIA11 (talk) 23:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Traditionally every notice on talk pages is orange, yes with the exception of the TOC. If you have a personal preference for it the other way, even if you want to contend that this is a matter of personal preference for me as well, a crusade through many articles switching all these boxes to your preference isn't really appropriate. If you think the "small" parameter makes the text unreadable, perhaps this is something to address at the template talk page. It's possible that at some resolutions the text becomes too small to read (although I doubt this as it's the standard size for "small" text). Equazcion •✗/C • 00:04, 24 Jan 2008 (UTC)
But I wouldn't consider the archive box to be a notice. Would you agree to having the orange color, but keeping everything else standard, i.e. sizes? And it's not that it is actually unreadable but space does not seem to be an issue, so why make it smaller? None of the other boxes have smaller text, normally. MrKIA11 (talk) 00:10, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • This post refers to the first comment in this section
Archive = User talk:Excirial/Archive %(counter)d
I guess you can see what this can cause, don't you? Your recent moves could, and im pretty sure, will have broken several peoples archiving bot setups. This means that their archives will get split between the format your moves made, and the formats the non updated bot lines still contain.
Anyway, this entire issue is getting to big for me to decide if this is a good move, or a Going-To-Be problem. I reported this to the Administrator Incident Noticeboard Direct link, which means the administrators will have a look at it. Maybe they will tell me i'm just one big complainer whining over nothing, and press some evidence under my nose that this was indeed a good move, but i rather have that happen, then seeing a whole lot of action that i don't really agree with.
One last this: This is by no means personal, so please don't feel insulted or angry by this report. Its just to get some clarity about this situation :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Excirial (talk • contribs) 00:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Actually I do look at all of the bots, and for the few archive pages i moved, either they were not being auto-archived, or I changed the bot code to correspond. MrKIA11 (talk) 00:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
(ec)Sorry, I meant "generally all talk page boxes", even if you don't consider this one a "notice" per se. They're pretty much all orange (with the exception of {{calm talk}}, I can't think of any that aren't). I don't think any change is necessary because the archive box just isn't that important that it needs to be displayed so prominently. People can see it just fine this way. But discussing this here isn't really relevant -- this would need to be brought up at the template talk page, where more people than just you and I would need to agree that a change is warranted. Equazcion •✗/C • 00:18, 24 Jan 2008 (UTC)
The other two templates do not even have this parameter, and there are definitely more pages using those two combined than this one. And I posted a comment on all three archive box templates, and WikiProject Templates, but only one person answered about it. MrKIA11 (talk) 00:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I see AzaToth replied to you. He's right, the "small" parameter simply utilizes mediawiki's "small" class. To change it you'd have to change a major element of the wiki. Anyway this really isn't a big problem, if it is a problem at all. I've never seen anyone complain about visibility issues when the box is set to small. Regarding Excirial's comment above: Yes he is just a big complainer, if he took this to ANI rather than just talking to you. I'm sure you didn't mean to break anyone's settings. I hope you know now that you shouldn't tamper with people's user space settings that way, but I doubt any permanent harm was done. People will simply revert the changes. Equazcion •✗/C • 00:32, 24 Jan 2008 (UTC)
That is what I was assuming people would do, but I have gotten one thank you for changing it. MrKIA11 (talk) 00:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
*Nods* Then i'm just a big complainer :). But as i stated above, and stated in the ANI report, i rather have an admin tell me that everything is A-Ok, then wondering if something is not A-Ok. I have seem some quite varied comments regarding this, ranging from: Good work, Looks nice to: Why did you do ThisAndThat. Personally i think the easiest way to stop all this is by having some sort of official response.
Also, as far as i know, ANI is not meant for requesting some form of sanctions (That what my beloved WP:AIAV is for). At the very least i'm interpreting ANI as a place where you can report something to get assistance with it. And in this case my request is just the question: Was this massive update a good move, Yes or No. Again, this request was meant to be purely informal, and not as some sort of judgement. And also, @Equazcion" I know i suggested that i might be called "one big complainer", but did you really have to affirm that one? It was merely meant as a statement that i might be overreacting, not as something i was looking for to have confirmed. :)
Oh and last, don't think that this is some kind of "Huge Mistake". I agree with Equazcion on this one that you most likely didn't break anything, especially if you edited the bot code. Also, my apologies for my first few comments. They seem to suffer a bit from what i can call the "Excirial Syndrome". In short: When i write and re-read them they seem A-Ok, but when i re-read them say, a few hours later, they sound unnecessarily harsh, and sometimes quite rude. Please know that being "Rude" is almost never something i do intentionally, and certainly not on issues like this.
Kind regards,
--Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 01:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Video game ratings

Hello MrKIA11. I've noticed that you've changed a number of video game ratings from the symbols to the expanded form of the rating (e.g. E > Everyone; T > Teen). I reverted some of your edits in order to keep the ratings in their symbolized forms. Within the context of video game articles, readers should already be familiar with their respective classification systems, however, if readers wish to learn more about the rating systems (such as ESRB, PEGI etc.) [and find out what the symbols stand for], they can just click on the link next to the rating for more detailed information. IMO, the only circumstances in which we should use words in favour of symbols is if a rating is not explicitly represented by a symbol (such as USK's "Unrestricted" rating). In this fashion, we can keep ratings consistent between articles and keep infoboxes tidy and free of omission (I don't understand why people feel the need to write ESRB's E10+ rating as "Everyone 10+". The symbol is self-explanatory :P). For an example of how numerous ratings can be neatly displayed, check out the Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories article. Cheers. Sillygostly (talk) 00:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I should be reported?

Whatever. You can see all my edits were in good faith. Timneu22 (talk) 18:53, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

revert

Under no circumstances should you have gone through various articles and made the reverts you did. You're just flooding people's watchlists. Some of the "Archive banners" received positive feedback from page watchers, but I guess you find it important enough to eliminate ALL TRACES of a template that you did not design. I don't think you're a very good wikipedian. Timneu22 (talk) 11:23, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

  • FYI, see the comments on my talk page! Cheers. andy (talk) 11:31, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Did you seriously revert this change? I tried to make your template BETTER by lining up the equals signs. Are you just going to revert EVERY CHANGE I MAKE ON THIS WIKI? Timneu22 (talk) 11:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll try again

Why did you revert my constructive edit to your proposed template? Timneu22 (talk) 12:57, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I was only trying to help by aligning equals signs, like all good templates. You don't have to be a jerk. Good day. Timneu22 (talk) 20:54, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Your response was curt, and thus rude, and thus you were being a jerk. Now you're calling me an ass. Grow up and leave me alone. (talk) 13:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Hi. A word of friendly advice: don't get drawn into a slanging match! Timneu22 was rude to you first and I've warned him. If he carries on this way I or someone else will escalate the warnings until maybe he gets the message (or maybe not). I'd steer clear if I were you, but if you do have to talk to him stay cool. :) andy (talk) 16:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Archive box

Hi, no problem. That page was an old test page that hadn't been updated in ages. Monotonehell 06:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

question

Why didn't you notify me of the VP discussion and User:MrKIA11/Archive Box? As the principal author of {{Archive box collapsible}} I would have appreciated it. User:Dorftrottel 23:22, February 19, 2008

No harm done. I'm more angry at myself that I didn't notice. User:Dorftrottel 23:58, February 19, 2008
Ah, and I don't use the watchlist. I never really learned how to handle the damn thing. User:Dorftrottel 00:25, February 20, 2008
The worst part is: I know it is useful. It's just, pages seem to be added to my watchlist almost at random (I know that's not actually the case, but my pattern recognition somehow fails). Oh well, one of these days I'm going to figure it out. User:Dorftrottel 00:34, February 20, 2008
I've deactived all those options, but page moves etc are still added, as are user talk pages when I warn users with—..... Wait a minute. ... TWINKLE is the culprit! I'll see if I can do something about it. User:Dorftrottel 00:41, February 20, 2008
Hm. Found Wikipedia:WikiProject_User_scripts/Scripts/Twinkle/doc#Configuration and adjusted my config accordingly. User:Dorftrottel 00:49, February 20, 2008

Surprising diff

Huh? [3] seems a bit unusual; just checking that it did what you meant it to do. --AndrewHowse (talk) 22:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks. (Lucky for me that I didn't just start mouthing off...) --AndrewHowse (talk) 22:28, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia Cleaner

Hi again,

Thanks for updating the documentation. I have added a few things just now.

I just have a doubt concerning this chapter. You are saying that blue is used for links to redirect pages. Are you sure ? Because it shouldn't be that way : links to redirect pages should be treated as links to normal pages, displayed in red, and can be fixed with Wikipedia Cleaner. Blue should be used only for templates (and only when the link to a dab page is normal) : for example, in Watergate scandal, the {{redirect|Watergate}} should be displayed in blue because this link is normal (it's currently not highlighted at all, because I haven't added {{redirect}} in my list).

Could you provide me with an example where a link is shown in blue and shouldn't ?

--NicoV (talk) 12:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I understand why you are thinking redirect links are in blue, but in fact, all links that are not links to dab pages are shown in blue in the current version. When I add the function for fixing redirects, I will probably show links to redirects in an other color (orange ?).

I understand also why you removed the features that are not currently available for the English wikipedia, but I prefer to have them with a comment for at least two reasons :

  • Currently, there's only partial documentation in French, English and Hebrew so the English documentation can also be used for other Wikipedia which do not have documentation (Catalan, Spanish, Dutch, ...)
  • I see them as an incentive to provide me the information I need to activate those features :)

Thanks for the Page d template and the list of models, version 0.53 takes this into account.

For the column names, I have to find a way to make it understandable directly in the program, but I don't know how yet. The columns are :

  • Page name
  • Number of articles in the main namespace linking to this page (select some lines and click on Update Information to see something)
  • Number of articles linking to this page
  • Maximum number of articles in the main namespace that should link to this page (you can set it in the comments)
  • Maximum number of articles that should link to this page
  • Comment

I added all the columns because I find this handy to work with my list of watched pages (once in a while, I select them all, click on Update and then I can easily see which dab page has new links since the last time I fixed them)

--NicoV (talk) 23:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi again,

I have started working on your suggestion for fixing redirect links. It's a preliminary work, but you can take a look at the Tools menu in the Analysis window to see the first result in 0.54.

--NicoV (talk) 22:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Version 0.55 is available. I think I have fixed the bugs you have seen and implemented your suggestions. I also added the Expand Templates window.

--NicoV (talk) 19:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello again. Couple of things:

  • I think you should change the wording for the Tools→Fix Redirects to Link ... to ..., instead of Replace ... by ...
  • When validate is clicked for a redirect page, the selection does not automatically move down to the next entry on the list
  • The Expand Templates window would be great, if you could do anything with it. Am I missing something, or is something to be implemented later?

Thanks, MrKIA11 (talk) 21:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'm off for holidays, will take a look at this when I am back home.
Expand templates is just here to saw the expanded text of a page, I'd be happy to do more with it but I don't know how.
--NicoV (talk) 17:27, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
I will see if I can show a page preview (that would be great), but I have to find something to render HTML in a Java program (maybe Cobra) --NicoV (talk) 10:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
First tests with Cobra seem good. Page preview will be available in the next release (0.61) --NicoV (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what's wrong, but version 0.61 is not downloading. I have restarted the program at least 5 times, but still nothing. MrKIA11 (talk) 23:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I know, I am on holidays and I don't have enough access to update it on my website, it will have to wait until the weekend. --NicoV (talk) 16:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
OK, no problem. I just assumed you had already since you updated the history of changes. MrKIA11 (talk) 16:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Version 0.61 is online, the preview is basic but can be helpful anyway I think. --NicoV (talk) 10:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I just updated the documentation. The only thing, is that only internal links have contextual menus, external links do not. This is not a problem, but according to the documentation, they should. I also have some recommendations for different wording in the program itself:

  • In the analysis window > Tools menu > Fix redirects, "Link ... by ..." should be "Link ... to ...". I actually wonder whether "Fix redirects" should even be included in the tools menu anymore, as it is easier and better to do it directly in the main text.
  • "Occurrence" is spelled with 2 rs, not 1

Still a great program MrKIA11 (talk) 01:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the documentation. I have added the features of v0.71 (not released yet) in the documentation, that's why some things doesn't seem to work (external links, different watched pages window, ...). I will fix the wording as you suggest and I will think about removing the Fix redirects menu. --NicoV (talk) 09:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Your use of flagicons

I have noticed you editing several video game articles by replacing the vgrelease tags with flagicons instead. Under, WP:VG/DATE,

Within the infobox, release dates should be provided using the template. Even if this format is not used, do not use flag icons in the infobox, instead, state the region/country by name or by their 2 or 3-letter country codes.

Just thought you should know about that. Strongsauce (talk) 02:08, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Dancing Stage Universe

Just out of curiosity, what were those edits meant to accomplish? --AeronPrometheus (talk) 22:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Infobox VG was recently overhauled, the template defaults to 264px now, and images have a maximum width of 252px. I checked, so that's why I hardcode the dimensions (It's a perfectionist thing for me). As for the other, I cap the first letter cause Wikipedia does (Again, perfectionist), however I did not know that Vgrelease could be stacked like that, I'll change it back. I also never liked filling templates with links either, but if you insist I suggest you use template Vgy for the year, so it links to that year in video gaming instead of general events. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 23:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I'm going leave it cause I see what you changed. As far as the DDR series goes there are really weird release regions for some of the mixes. Universe was not released to New Zealand as the template's perimeters say that entry emcompasses. The English version of SuperNova 2 was released to North American and South America, which that style doesn't have an entry for, South Korea exclusives, the list goes on. So I think I'll keep doing it this way until they expand the template a little. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 23:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Everything still says 256 cause no one bothers to update the doc pages. It's not a browser thing, unless some browser have bigger pixels than others. There must be something in the code tree that's making it bigger, eyeballing it I see a white space of five on each side, plus the 1px border around the template. 6+6=12, 164-12=152 *shrugs*.
I would like to know where you heard that Vgy was being called into question. The only results I get on the site simply tell you how to use it and what it does. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 00:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I get it now, I didn't know that the Wiki code did that even. I still prefer not to link them at all under Vgrelease. :P --AeronPrometheus (talk) 01:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:VG stats

Hey, take a look at this, I mentioned the NAA page there, perhaps you have some input. Cheers, JACOPLANE • 2008-04-3 23:03

Request to change article class

Hi, can you take another look at Pro Evolution Soccer 2008 (Wii version)? I'm pretty sure it's not a stub-class any more. :D --NSider (talk) 07:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

SingStar article

Thanks for cleaning up List of SingStar titles. The templates make the code look much cleaner. --Tntnnbltn (talk) 20:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:Images needed

Is "Template:Images needed" an appropriate template to use in article space? GregManninLB (talk) 17:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

RSS feed

I noticed you changed the link for the RSS feed. What did you change exactly? Cheers, JACOPLANE • 2008-04-20 16:17

Best new articles

What would you say are the 5 best new VG articles created in April? Perhaps we could add something to the next newsletter. As you can see, I've already proposed that we add something like "In March, there were 57 new articles", but I was thinking it would be cool to put a spotlight on the best new articles. Cheers, JACOPLANE • 2008-04-23 17:13

See my proposal for the newsletter here. JACOPLANE • 2008-04-23 22:52

disambig project talkpage

Hi, MrKIA11. Thank you for cleaning up the shortcut box location on WT:WPDAB. --Gwguffey (talk) 04:35, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Headers

I think the new style was confusing some tools causing people to have duplicate listings. I'm not personally opposed to a change, but think it may need a little bit of advance notice, perhaps at WT:MFD. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 23:31, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

24 Wikiproject Assessment

Thanks for removing them. It's fine by me, thanks for lending a hand. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 14:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Disambig-Class subcats ending in articles instead of pages

Maybe the other 10+ cats that end in pages should be listed as a group at WP:CFD, too. --Gwguffey (talk) 14:24, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

VG NewsLetter

speedies

A7 db bio is only for REAL people, for fictional characters it's necessary to use prod or afd. See WP:CSD. (or try a merge or a redirect) DGG (talk) 16:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

vgrelease

Do you realize that changing the usage of the {{vgrelease}} template in some articles (such as Spyro 2: Ripto's Rage! and Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction) will rearrange the chronological release date order?

{{vgrelease|NA=[[January 1]] [[2008]]}} {{vgrelease|JP=[[January 2]] [[2008]]}} will appear as:

NA January 1, 2008
JP January 2, 2008

{{vgrelease|NA=[[January 1]] [[2008]]|JP=[[January 2]] [[2008]]}} will appear as:

JP January 2, 2008
NA January 1, 2008

--Silver Edge (talk) 03:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not certain if there is consensus on the release date order, but in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video_games/Archive 38#Alphabetical Ordering there was consensus that the platforms in the platform field of {{Infobox VG}} should be listed in chronological order and then alphabetical order if necessary, which lead me to add this to the article guidelines, so based on that, I'm assuming that the consensus is chronological order for release dates too. When changing the template to a single call, its order is Japan, North America, PAL region, Europe, Australasia, and then international version, so it is not in alphabetical order; I believe it is in that order because many games are released to those regions in that order. I suggest bringing this up at WT:WikiProject Video games before making any changes to {{Vgrelease}} or changing the template to a single call in every video game article. --Silver Edge (talk) 03:18, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (May 2008)

Damn that was quick!

Thanks for adding the MfD to the list of VG deletions so quickly. Do you not sleep? :) Gazimoff WriteRead 23:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Grading scheme

You're jumping the gun just a bit. Based on that Cfd, the consensus among 4 people was that those categories listed should match all the others, and it would probably be better if all the others were renamed to pages. There was no consensus to rename Category:Disambig-Class articles to Category:Disambig-Class pages, as that Cfd was not under discussion. The admin closing the discussion stated "I don't want to do a 357-category rename with no other input...Either way, please nominate the "articles" categories for renaming." The grading scheme template should reflect the organization of Category:Articles by quality. By making that one change, you are potentially breaking hundreds of links currently in use by the majority of projects.

The proper way to do this is seek further discussion and have a Cfd for Category:Disambig-Class articles and all of its sub-categories. Once there is consensus that Category:Disambig-Class articles should be renamed, along with all of the sun-categories, then the grading scheme template should be changed. So if you want to move ahead with renaming all of the categories to "pages," I'd start with making a Cfd for Category:Disambig-Class articles and its subcategories. Then, you need to publicize the Cfd in several places (at a minimum at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council, and possibly on all of the effected project's talk pages).

Additionally, keep in mind that if the categories are changed, you will also need to change almost 400 templates that categorize the pages. And it won't be as easy as renaming of one word from "articles" to "pages." I would say that most templates put pages automatically in "class-Class project articles," where class is the specified parameter, and project is the project's name. It is much easier to code the templates with this generic article classification, than adding additional conditional statements for each classification.

By the way, my own opinion is that pages is a better and more descriptive name for the contents of the category. However, I would still prefer to use articles, since it means that there is a consistent nomenclature for all classifications: "class-Class project articles." And if you still want to attempt this huge undertaking (editing hundreds of custom-made templates), I'd recommend also creating Cfds to rename all of the non-article classification categories from "articles" to "pages" (NA, Category, Disambig, Image, Portal, Project, Redirect, and Template). --Scott Alter 02:47, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Collapsible archive box

Thank you for fixing that. What did you do, though? It looks like the only thing you did that I hadn't was add a "1=" How does that work? Rossami (talk) 01:41, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ferrari Challenge Cover.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ferrari Challenge Cover.png. 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) 12:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for moving the AFD discussion to the right date. Strange that. I actually used the link from the WP:AFD page as I had to refresh my memory on bundling nominations. (Note to self: Next time scroll down and notice that there are quite a lot of nominations for a day that is only 30 minutes old (Wikipedia time) :O)) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 00:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Page d

Template:Page d has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Taemyr (talk) 12:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion sorting

Just a friendly heads up. This edit messed up the deletion sorting scripts, because the name of the page no longer matched Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Compact. If you move another deletion sorting page, it would be really helpful if you updated the deletion sorting list, too. Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:TRNC is a Joke

Sorry, but MFD is for userboxes. See the Introduction for details. bibliomaniac15 03:21, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.

Thank you for adding the AfD stuff in my AfD thing-y. Now, how to use the AfD template in articles(That are nonimated for deletion)? --Fivexthethird (talk) 19:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)