User talk:Pagrashtak/archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

Your FAC vote on AYBABTU

Just wanted to drop you a quick note with regard to your Object vote on this article nomination and let you know that I agreed with your comments and made a number of careful changes based on each of your objections. As a result, I hope you'll reconsider your vote. Either way, thanks for taking the time to consider the article! ⇒ BRossow ^T/_C 21:25, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

LOZ, the original

I'm seeing all this good work done with various LOZ games. But we haven't really tried to get the orignal up to par. Should we work on that? ZeWrestler ^Talk 19:54, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. I mean, after all, it was the original. —Eternal Equinox | talk 00:15, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, we should, especially since it's an essential CVG article. It's on my long term wish list. The work I've done on Majora's Mask and The Wind Waker is partially fueled by the fact that their developments were covered by internet media sources. Legend of Zelda's history won't be that easy. When the workshop recommended by Jacoplane becomes operational, I was planning to recommend that article for its first efforts. --Pagrashtak 00:46, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Workshop

Hi, yes of course by all means edit the page. I've clarified this on the WPCVG talk page. I haven't done much on the proposal since I started it, mainly because I was busy hacking Current computer and video games events. I'll try to sit down and make a concerted effort at improving the proposal in the near future, so that we can get started on actually improving articles. Cheers! Jacoplane 04:30, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Vandoren

Thanks for the criticisms : ) About the images, I wasn't sure what to license them under. Since they were all basic product images (I got them off Amazon.com), I assumed legally, they were similar to logos. If you have any suggestions, that would be great.

Thanks, Bcem2 20:38, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. When I added the images, I wasn't sure how to change the information, but I just figured how to do it Bcem2 22:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

BTW, on an unrelated note, what clarinet equipment are you using?

I've got a plastic Vito, wooden Henkin (which I believe is now Artley), and a wooden Buffet Crampon. I don't know the models off hand. And of course, Vandoren reeds. I really haven't played since college, though. --Pagrashtak 22:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Arthur Ernest Percival

Thanks for automating the footnotes - I wish I had known about this before! Can I ask for your help in a couple of areas on the comments you raised?

• Do you have an article in mind with good multiple refs that you can refer me to?
• re the Cork flying column image this seems to be referred to by 7 Wiki articles but I have no idea of the original source. Can you give any advice on improving the copyright status or perhaps it would be best to remove the link?

thanks again Nickhk

I have (attempted!) to add a fair use rationale to the pic you were concerned about. Is there anything else you need to see done to support the article Nickhk

Super Mario 64

I see that you decided to include the much-required references for Super Mario 64. Good job! I admire your devotion. —Eternal Equinox | talk 02:40, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. No one seemed to be doing it, so I figured I might as well step in. Are we getting any closer to you accepting featured status? I think there's some things you can strike from your original objections now. --Pagrashtak 04:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I've stricken some of my objections. Anyway, are you going to be enhancing the article in any other way? I've noticed that very little information regarding the development is featured. Please reply on my talk page. Thanks! —Eternal Equinox | talk 19:11, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Featured list article

The Original Barnstar Award is given to recognise particularly fine contributions to Wikipedia, to let people know that their hard work is seen and appreciated, and that we thank them

Hello. I noticed List of Mega Man weapons has failed the featured list review. This is unfortunate, but I was glad that the experience helped the article's presentation and overall quality. I am especially thankful for your comments and critisism; it was quite helpful, and without your request, I would not made this article. Thank you very much for your helpfulness and for giving me the push to complete it. Hopefully, the list will suceed next time. I also would like you to have this barnstar. I hope you'll continue critiqueing the list and please leave any more suggstions on its talkpage or my own. Thanks again. -Zero^Talk 05:04, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!

You've put a lot of effort into Current computer and video games events. This barnstar is in recognition of that, as well as your efforts to improve WikiProject CVG in general. Congratulations, and keep up the good work! --Pagrashtak 05:34, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the barnstar! Maybe we should create a CVG barnstar, there are a lot of people who really deserve one. Cheers! Jacoplane 05:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

No problem, you've done a lot of great work. It's funny, I was just thinking that we need a CVG barnstar. We've already got the controller image, we just need someone to smack it in front of a star. --Pagrashtak 05:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

How about this: Image:BarnstarCVG.png? Jacoplane 06:13, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Selected article on portal

I thought you might like to know that I've made The Wind Waker the selected article for Portal:Computer and video games. Jacoplane 00:29, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey, that's really cool, thanks! --Pagrashtak 00:34, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my references

The Zelda series article was my first time working with references; thank you for fixing all my silly mistakes. Nifboy 03:13, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for adding the "old peer review" template at Historical revisionism (political). I thought about adding it, but there was Zero activity while it was in process, so I was uncertain whether I should bother. But thank you for tying up the lose ends some of us leave dangling. --DanielCD 22:32, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Typographic quotes

May I ask why you're taking the trouble of converting certain Zelda articles written with typewriter quotes to typographic quotes? Pagrashtak 06:22, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Not just Zelda articles, all the articles on my watchlist. There is no concensus on the matter and either is deemed acceptable. I think it looks much better, and more professional, to use curved quotes, especially since some of the articles are FAs or close to FA level, and therefore stand a good chance of being printed in Wikipedia: 1.0. I know we can’t expect every contributor to use them, but since they’re articles that I pass through once a week or more myself, it’s a small matter to convert new submissions to the prettier format. Note that I very carefully edited all links so that the quote style wouldn’t interfere. I also left measurements, like feet/inches, with the straight marks, as they should be. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 14:25, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

You're correct that there is no concensus, which is exactly why you shouldn't mass change them, just like British/American spellings and reference formats. I happen to prefer typewriter quotes, mostly for consistency. Pagrashtak 22:12, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

It’s a completely different issue. English variants are a matter of regional differences. Quotes are a matter of ease and convenience vs. aesthetics. Also, there are accepted( and sensible) guidelines on how to use English variants, there are no particular preferences or guidelines given for quotation mark appearance. As for “consistency”, the articles were consistent, because I took the time to change them in their entirety. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 23:25, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

It's not. Articles about subjects that do not have a specific American or British relation should reflect the spellings used by the major contributor. Changing color to colour just because you prefer the second would not be tolerated in those articles. Similarly, converting ref/note to <ref> is not done without the consent of the major contributor. The same should hold for typewriter quotes. As for consistency, what I meant was: Further additions to the article as far more likely to be made with typewriter quotes. Leaving the articles with typewriter quotes will eliminate the issue of converting new additions. The article will also be consistent with the vast majority of Wikipedia articles. Finally, there are is no need for a silly piped link like [[The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask|The Legend of Zelda: Majora’s Mask]]. Pagrashtak 23:32, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

It is. English variants are based on both convention and the approval of major, respected institutions. Quote style differences are based on the limitations of standard keyboard layouts, and the unwillingness of most computer users to make the extra effort. English spelling within the Wikipedia has established guidelines( those you cited), quote style does not. I don’t really know much about <ref>, but if it’s and aesthetic/content thing, I think it, like quotes( given the lack of guidelines), has more to do with being bold and improving articles. If we were trying to make each article consistent with the “vast majority” of others, we would change all English to American English, but we certainly don’t do that. Also, the “vast majority” of professional-quality publications use proper quotes, and isn't that what Wikipedia strives to be? The same institutions in all English-speaking countries which set the standard spellings for the region will almost all agree that differentiated quotes are more proper and professional, and even word processing programs have features like “smart quotes” to convert them as you type.

As for maintenance, I volunteered to do that, to keep the articles internally consistent without trying to force anything on contributors. And users who actually care about the appearance of the article and are familiar with the Wikipedia can easily insert real quotes from the table below the edit box. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 00:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

You prefer typographic, I prefer typewriter. There's no concensus on which to use. Please explain how changing an existing article written with typewriter quotes to use only typographic is justified.

Regarding English/British, try moving Color to Colour, and changing all instances of color to colour in the article and see how well that goes over. The guidelines for quotes or the spelling are the same for that article: either is fine, but stick with the established version. Pagrashtak 01:38, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

There’s no concensus for quote style, but unlike British/American English, there’s also no guideline that says they should be based on the first major contributor. It’s a completely different issue. While there’s certainly no reason the contributors to an article can’t change them back or reach a consensus to decide, saying they shouldn’t be changed in the first place contravenes WP:BOLD.

As for British English, I wasn’t proposing that we should change it to American English, I was commenting on your statement that “the vast majority” of Wikipedia articles have typewriter quotes. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 20:35, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair use images

from User talk:HighwayCello

Hi, I noticed you added some Pokémon material to your user page. However, fair use images are not allowed on user pages according to fair use policy item 9. Also, please do not include your user page in categories such as Category:Grass Pokémon, as those categories are intended for articles. Pagrashtak 18:33, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

First of all, thank you for being so kind! I only had them on my user page as part of the WP:PCP, as I have trouble remembering the design of infoboxes and tables. You were so kind as to incinuate that I had done it on purpose, when, if you have even bothered to look, was not the case.

Second of all, I am a new member of Wikipedia, and I somewhat doubt that you went through the entire fair use policy before writing a single word!

Third of all! I did not add my user page in categories such as "Grass-type Pokémon"! As I said, I am a new member that hadn't noticed that when you add in a user box with species type tags that it automatically adds the article onto the list! And amazingly, neither did you, so you have absolutely no right to hound me about it!

I appreciate that I shouldn't have had the images on my page, but I never knew that, so you had no right to be rude! I am just incredibly mad, because you successfully managed to completely insult me and be incredibly prejudice about it. Highway 19:01, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry you took offense, none was intended. It's understandable that you have not read the fair use policy; that's why I was informing you about it. I was trying to be nice by alerting you to the problems on your user page so you could fix them. What should I have done instead? Pagrashtak 22:25, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

What about User:Snorlax? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WikidSmaht (talk • contribs) .

categorizing cvg characters by last name?

Zero wanted a concensus on that. Your input would be apreciated.--Dangerous-Boy 07:36, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Bravo!

Regarding your recent edit on Mario -- I just want you to know that you're my hero forever for understanding the redundancy and outright incorrectness of the term "fictional character." SFT | Talk 12:44, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Biting Newcomers?

I take offence at your comment re: Rush (Aly & AJ song). I was wishing the nominator well and trying to hint to the other people commenting that the article was submitted by an apparently very young person. Their critisisms were rather harsh and I was trying to point the person's age out to them. As for your comment: "I suggest you read Wikipedia:What is a featured article". No thanks, I don't need to. One of my articles was just named "featured". See: 1996 U.S. campaign finance scandal or just click my name. Ciao! --Jayzel 01:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I apologize if it wasn't your intent; I misinterpreted your remarks (especially "long, boring grown-up topics") as condescension. I referred you to "What is a featured article" because you expressed the belief that only certain subject matter can qualify for featured status, but this is not the case. The featured article criteria on that page say nothing about the actual subject of an article, only the manner in which is it written. The fact is that Rush (Aly & AJ song) could in fact become featured were it not for the fact that there are probably not enough editors of sufficient quality interested in improving it. I'm certainly not. Congratulations on your featured article, it's great to have editors working though the FAC process. I know how difficult it can be, I've worked on a couple myself. Again, sorry for the accusation, and I look forward to seeing more of your work at FAC! Pagrashtak 01:37, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

re: SUBSTing templates

Thank you for explaining it to me, and I apologize if I seemed difficult or stubborn. I originally reverted them since I wanted my talk page to be completely transparent and for the exact intent of anyone who left me messages to show (I wouldn't have dug up, some months ago, a vandalism warning to display if I didn't feel so strongly about having nothing to hide,) but most anyone checking my talk page would know that's a form message anyway. (Before anyone asks, I feel that the obscene remarks I have recieved I am justified in censoring since I make it clear at the top of my talk page that I reserve the right to do so, and if anyone really wanted to see them, it wouldn't be difficult to figure out to check the history.) Y0u | Y0ur talk page 03:10, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm 99% sure the second warning was trolling (which I figure, just shows that that person was trolling at the time) but the first ones were legetimately directed toawards me (albeit under an IP address and not this username.) I listed the diffs after the messages. Y0u | Y0ur talk page 07:24, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

They Might Be Giants

I've tried to address your concerns. Do you think it can go back on the Good Articles list? —User:ACupOfCoffee@ 02:21, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I suggest converting your references to inline citations. I've done one as an example, since I could tell where it belonged. It would be better if you could find a direct reference for that source (such as the proper citation to the actual Times piece). I would also avoid using other wikis as references. Pagrashtak 22:27, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Balloon Fight

Do you see any other ways I can improve the Balloon Fight Article? Gamerforever 18:44, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

About iStory

Yes, ok, I understand. I shall not do that anymore, Pagra. BTW, Yes, Jazzer3 is me, I just forgot that I was registered as Jazzer2 and not Jazzer3..

TfD nomination of Template:Logo

Template:Logo 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. --Esprit15d 19:56, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Featured Article status

Hi. I'm attempting to get Mega Man Zero to featured article status, and I'll post it on WP:PR shortly. I also want to try again in getting List of Mega Man weapons to featured list status and would like you to contnue discussing on that respective peer review page and its talkpage.

Finally, I apologize yet again, for that unintended rude comment on the wikiproject talk; I do indeed respect other's opinions and thoughts and I truly meant no offense. I do hope you consider assisting in helping me get these articles to featured status. Hope to see you on the talkpages. -Zero^Talk 15:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. I'll take a look at the article in just a minute. By the way, you forgot to sign your peer review request. Pagrashtak 23:24, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Have you looked at the talkpage for Mega Man Zero series...? There's some image links I'd like to discuss what to do with. -Zero^Talk 05:19, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Leet

We've got a vote going on Talk:Leet (language)#Requested move. I thought you might want to add to that, since you commented, but haven't put in a vote. -- Netoholic @ 00:23, 9 March 2006 (UTC)