User talk:MrStalker

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is MrStalker's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to MrStalker.
Archives: 1, 2, 3


BGE Revolution


WikiProject Video games



Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3


Contents

[edit] battlefield heroes

my brothers friend works at ea. im not lying. he is making bad company and said heroes will be out on July 2008. Agent007ravi (talk) 22:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

That's not a good enough reference. And since you live in England, and Battlefield is developed in Stockholm, I personally don't belive you. --MrStalker (talk) 13:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Battlefield Heroes v. 2.0

Hey, if you know for a fact that it's not 3rd person (and I'm not saying it is or isn't, because I don't know), then you need to remove the reference to it being 3rd person in the body of the article. -- JTHolla! 17:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say it wasn't. It's neither. It's both. --MrStalker (talk) 17:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
The point is, if it's grounds for being deleted from the spot you deleted it, it needs to be deleted throughout the article. -- JTHolla! 19:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't say in the article that it is a third-person shooter. --MrStalker (talk) 19:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

According to wikipedia any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. With the article said to have been" written like an advertisement". Adding a section about the controversy between the games is simply informative and adding items of interest to the article, hence increasing the integrity of the wiki page. The article was obviously written with a biased view of advertising the game and gameplay. Taking out a portion of an article for being informative, even if the information might be negative towards the subject, is as if you went to a page about Eliot Spitzer and saw nothing about his recent scandal. Therefore my addition to the article is in "good-faith" as an attempt to make the article well informed and complete. However, I am giving you a warning that the deletion of my addition is a "deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia" , otherwise known as vandalism and have been reverted. Wiki articles are not supposed to suppress the information on its subject, they are supposed to be informatively enlightening even if it may sound negative to the subject(Don't make it sound like a game ad!). I can understand thinking that an opposing view of a subject is bad, but to say that VERY TRUE facts about something is vandalism is misinformed. Do not delete wiki parts because you have a personal belief against them, delete the ones that are not informative. Thankyou for the time to clear up this misunderstanding, have a good day.—Preceding unsigned comment added by TF2isgreaterthanBFH (talk • contribs) 12:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Your contribution clearly violates WP:NPOV and WP:NOR. You re-adding the material after it has been removed per these guidelines, clearly constitutes vandalism. Please stop or you will be blocked. --MrStalker (talk) 20:19, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Red Alert 3

Hello. General consensus is to alphabetise platforms and media. P comes before W comes before X, hence the ordering of PS3, Windows, X360. Same logic applies with the media (DVD&Blu-ray). Give us a shout if you disagree. Thanks! Fin©™ 19:30, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry there, didn't see your message on the talk page. There doesn't seem to be any mention on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Article_guidelines, but I took my recent action after a debate on the GTA IV talk page - in which, all participants (save Xeno, who I've had this conversation with already today), supported the alphabeticalising (to keep away from POV) of platform and media - Xeno kept changing the order on GTA IV. Shout back if you want to discuss it more. Fin©™ 19:35, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello again. Sonce yesterday, I've added the topic to WP:VG, and a general consensus of "chronological, if different dates exist, alphabetical for same dates" has been formed. As RA3 is a future game, alphabetical should be used. Thanks! Fin©™ 10:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Looks like WP:CREEP to me. --MrStalker (talk) 14:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Your edit to Talk:Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas 2

The rank glitch is unsuitable for inclusion based on WP:NOT#GUIDE. Per WP:FORUM and Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Editing_comments I removed the section as material not relevant to improving the article. xenocidic (talk) 14:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

In my opinion the material was very much relevant to improve the article. Also, follow the spirit of the rule, not the letter of it. There are much on variuos talk pages not directly relevant to improve the respective article. --MrStalker (talk) 14:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm of the school of thought that spreading knowledge on how to cheat is generally A Bad Thing™ . Teaching people to glitch is way too game-guidey for WP. But whatever. xenocidic (talk) 14:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

MrStalker, Xenocidic's removal was clearly within policy. Please don't give people warnings for things that benefit the encyclopedia. Perhaps you should read WP:TALK, WP:NOT and WP:FORUM before issuing further warnings for talk page refactoring, a process that is both acceptable and somewhat common on video game articles. ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 19:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

My interpretation of policy is that comments relating to the improvement of the article should not be removed. Clearly there is difference in opinion. You may interpret policy like you want but honestly don't care. --MrStalker (talk) 22:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] No content in Category:Digital Illusions CE games

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Digital Illusions CE games, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Digital Illusions CE games has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Digital Illusions CE games, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 15:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Empty categories

Got your message. I see your point. There was a backlog and we had to delete a lot of stuff. These empty categories were included in the sweep, maybe mistakenly. If you want, they can be undeleted. Please let me know. Cheers! -- Alexf42 17:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] C&C template

How is the mere adding of the six factions of the Red Alert & Generals games, the developers and publishers, omitted expansion packs and the re-ordering of titles according to release date in any way whatsoever related to speculation, or in any way unrelated to Command & Conquer?

Please do not blatantly revert large edits without making any distinction between controversial edits and simple additions. It is arrogant, dismissive and unconstructive, and only invites disputes and editing wars. Discuss this issue on the template's talk page with myself and other editors, before reverting the "main series" and "spin-off titles" sections. All the other additions I've made to the template have no reason to be disputed by anyone. 84.196.74.217 (talk) 13:03, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

First of all, there is no articles about the factions you added, therefor there shouldn't be any such entries in the template. The links you added links to their real-world correlate, which has nothing to do with the C&C franchise. And, for example, calling Red Alert 3 a spin-off is purely speculative.
No reason to be disputed? You cleary doesn't how it works around here. Please check WP:CON, previous consensus stands for now. --MrStalker (talk) 13:28, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
I'd like a link to a Wikipedia policy article that clearly states that linking to real-world correlates is undesired in a video game franchise template. Secondly, this reason you have cited does not relate to all of the new factions I have added, and as such you still have not provided any explanations as to why you reverted those as well. Additionally your response is still in no way explaining why you have also repeatedly reverted such additions as the publishers and developers of the C&C franchise to the template.
Red Alert 3 was described as a spin-off game in the official Command & Conquer website's featured news story section, on February 14th of this year. This news story was entitled "Red Alert 3 Announcement Video & Screens!", and can be consulted at the aforementioned website at any time. If you are lacking in such up-to-date knowledge, you may not be the best choice to take a prominent position in this debate, and should leave this to other editors who are more knowledge of recent developments in the franchise.
Please read Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith, as clearly you do not understand how proper communication between editors is asked to be conducted on this website. 84.196.74.217 (talk) 14:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
There is no specific policy for navboxes, but it is common practice and a consensus to include articles related to the subject. United States, China, Allies and the Soviet Union are not related to C&C, and GLA haven't got any article. Where can I read RA2 is a spin-off then? And Generals? And please don't accuse me of uncivilty, as it's considered uncivil on your part. --MrStalker (talk) 14:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
If there is no specific policy stating real-life correlates are undesirable in a video game template, then there exists no reason to revert the additions. The definition of "spin-off" according to http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spin-off:
" 3. something that is imitative or derivative of an earlier work, product, or establishment "
Since there is no source I am aware of which explicitely states that Red Alert 2 and Generals are canonical parts of the main story arc of the C&C franchise, there according to the above definition of the term exists no reason as to why they should not be designated as spin-offs. If you do have sources in which Generals is mentioned as for example happening in between the first C&C game and Tiberian Sun, or in which Red Alert 2 is explicitely mentioned as taking place in between the first Red Alert and the first Command & Conquer, then please provide them. 84.196.74.217 (talk) 14:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Rrr2-wii-cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Rrr2-wii-cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NotifyBot (talk) 14:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Some congratulations are due.

I've been taking a look at various other templates, notably those of other major video game franchises such as that of Zelda, Metal Gear and Half-Life. The C&C template is simply miles ahead of any of them in terms of style and informative quality.

That's in part due to your contributions and constructive feedback, so I thought I'd just come out and say this up front. We've had bumpy rides in the past, but the C&C articles are definitely improving because of it. So, it's all good.

Well done. Kalamrir (talk) 20:17, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, and congrats to you as well. After reviewing our past discussions I must confess I feel they were at times rather lame and about trivial things. I have discovered that mostly we agree in large parts, and then these huge disputes have grown up from a minor disagreement. The only explaination I have is that both of us might fit the description of fanatics. At times there were some uncivilty on my part, and I apologize for that. My only defence is that at times I've feelt a bit stressed out, and I hope we can put our differences behind us. Recently I have come to realize that it sometimes is better to just ignore minor issues. I also must say you have made see things from an different angle, large bacause of your overwhelming masses of text which I really don't have the strength to dispute. That and the fact that the current revision only differs slightly from my original one. Funny thing, I hardly know what we were nagging about. :P That said, I think there are some issues left to discuss, which is the biggest reason for my dispute with the anon user, that I will bring up on the proper talk page in due time. Right now, I will call it quits for the night. As said, it's all good. --MrStalker (talk) 21:28, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Heh. Perhaps something of an unfair advantage I have on Wiki -- I have an extensive background in touch typing, so I pour out these large slabs of text in no time. At any rate, it was definitely time that I gave you these credits and thanks, because you were the one who launched the idea of grouping the games according to universe, rather than "series", which indeed was always dodgy given what the sources were saying. This idea really worked out, to be honest.
Be sure to raise the issues you've talked about. Given the progress that we've already made, there is no doubt in my mind that the C&C template will become something editors of other franchises will come look at for inspiration in the near future. I was pretty surprised just how much better ours was starting to become compared to everyone else's. Kalamrir (talk) 22:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to intrude here, I just thought here was as good a place as any to congratulate both of you for your fine work on the template! Well done, it really is miles ahead of pretty much any template I've seen on here.Caissa's DeathAngel (talk) 04:22, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
There's no need to be sorry. Thank you for your nice comments. I'm pleased how this worked out and I belive this good spirit can continue to exist into the future. Again, thanks. --MrStalker (talk) 10:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
  • No doubt you meant "nice" when you wrote "nive" (not to be confused with "naive"). And agreed, the template is shiny. xenocidic (talk) 12:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I meant. Error corrected :P --MrStalker (talk) 22:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


My congrats to you both as well. ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 22:25, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 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. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

[edit] Template:Rayman series

Hi.

This (and particularly this within) may be of interest. Sardanaphalus (talk) 08:34, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. But since the template don't use any such characters there is no problem. --MrStalker (talk) 08:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
As there aren't many links in the template, the possibility of one or more of the {{·}}s colliding with the template's righthand side is virtually nil unless it's being viewed in a (very) small window. As a template carries more links, however, the possibility rises; hence the {{nowrap begin}}--{{·w}}--{{nowrap end}} solution outlined in Wikipedia:Line break handling. At least, that's my understanding. Sardanaphalus (talk) 15:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
The css-class nowraplinks and {{·}} works perfectly in most cases, {{nowrap begin}}--{{·w}}--{{nowrap end}} is only necessary in rare exceptions. --MrStalker (talk) 16:21, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Intriguing. I mostly use Firefox on a Windows XP PC and see this little problem fairly regularly. Sardanaphalus (talk) 00:47, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, don't blame the coding, because it looks perfectly good in Internet Explorer 7. --MrStalker (talk) 18:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Ahh yes, I forgot about a discussion I was involved with in the "Template:Systems science (and maybe elsewhere)" thread here. (In short, it looks like a current Firefox bug.) Thanks to your comments for prompting my memory. Sardanaphalus (talk) 03:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] VG Newsletter

[edit] DDR SuperNova 2

Actually, they are not the same game. This article is about the Arcade Version. The home versions (except for the Japanese one) are completely different from the arcade version, and only contain some songs from the arcade version, plus other stuff. ViperSnake151 01:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fast and Furious

Hi, Don't forget to cleanup the links that went to the old Fast and Furious. Usually the page move would create a redirect, and it did here, but once you took that out you left some broken links behind. Thanks! --AndrewHowse (talk) 12:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Okey, thanks for your help! --MrStalker (talk) 13:01, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AOE Template

Recently, you deleted Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds from Template: Age of Empires series (rather vehemently it seems, considering your edit summary). I don't think you were aware that this game and its expansion pack used the Age of Empires II engine. It's pretty obvious if you play the game that it came from that. There's been some debate as to whether or not it should be included in the template (personally, I'm part of the crowd that thinks it should and I added it there some time ago). Anyway, I wanted to let you know as to why the game was on the template in the first place. Thunderforge (talk) 02:59, 28 April 2008 (UTC) EDIT: Just realized you already knew this and wrote about it on the talk page. My bad.

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

Thanks for uploading Image:Nfsc-cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rayman Raving Rabbids 3

So I have a reason for it to be a redirect, you have nothing to say about the subject besides that there was a video, and your only response is "take it to afd"? AfD isn't for this. Why should it be an article? Existing doesn't make it deserving. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The WPVG Newsletter (May 2008)

[edit] Re:Deleted category contents

Other than the CFD notice, all that was on the page was-

{{DEFAULTSORT:Fast and the Furious, The}}
[[Category:Action films by series]]
[[Category:Auto racing films]]
[[Category:The Fast and the Furious|Films]]
[[Category:Universal Pictures films]]

So nothing of any real interes, sorry. J Milburn (talk) 08:53, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] thanks!

Thank you so much for the barnstar! *pins it to chest* And thank you also for uploading better versions of the pics. I once knew what it meant to get it down to low res as I had done so before, but have since forgotten and can't find the original instructions. Something to do with the 72dpi? How did you reduce the file size? Was it the save for internet feature? Ah, teach me! (I have Photoshop 7). As for the HD video, it still looks blurry to me, oddly. In any case, I've watched that video way too many times already... clicketyclickyaketyyak 19:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, the image with Faith I captured with PrntScrn in Windows Media Player (with overlay disabled) from HD source found at GameTrailers and pasted into Photoshop CS2, I then used a reduze noise filter and resized to 640 px wide using the bicupic sharper setting, and then saved with the "save for web"-feature in jpeg with "very high" quality setting. The other two I copied directly from the website by looking at the source code and finding the images' urls. The HD video is HD, but it isn't exactly Bluray-quality. --MrStalker (talk) 20:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nfsu-ps2-cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Nfsu-ps2-cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Future of Task Forces(part two: Atari)

(a message I left on WPVG talk page) In archive 41, we talked about sending video game series task forces into whole Publisher task forces. Example: Devil May Cry to Capcom. I would like to request that the actual creators of the task forces would meet here to discuss the issue I talk of in Archive 41.Gears Of War 01:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:BGE2-scr1.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:BGE2-scr1.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 non-free media 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The WPVG Newsletter (June 2008)

[edit] Your bot...

made this edit which is not very good. --MrStalker (talk) 06:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll look into it. Thanks for notifying me. Your vigilance is commendable. :) -- Cat chi? 11:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Spore-logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Spore-logo.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) 05:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Official Spore Box

Official box can be seen here. JAF1970 (talk) 19:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Unless you can find a natural 256px (or bigger) version of the Spore box, don't use blurry blow-ups. There's no rush - it's better to have sharp and goodlooking than ugly and blurry. JAF1970 (talk) 21:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Spore-win-cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Spore-win-cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:JC2-CVG-scr1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:JC2-CVG-scr1.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) 05:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)