User talk:S@bre/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To leave a new message on my talk page, click here.
Discussion archive
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.

Archives


Contents

Re:Protoss page

Well I think the psionics section can be shortened to Warp Gates, Stasis technology (Cells, arbiter), and psionic crystals can all be merged into one section. As for the other stuff, I'll be gone until late this afternoon, but I'll take another look when I get back. The Clawed One 13:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Performing the edit now. The Clawed One 14:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
What do you think? The Clawed One 04:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Hm...well it sounds like a good idea, as long as it isn't too big. I say we try and see how it works. The Clawed One 14:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Ideas for Species Page

- Obviously, concept art.

- Reviews of the game, and especially mention of the Three-Species Set-Up that was a revolution for RTSs at the time.

- Also, perhaps were should add "Minor Creatures" for the species the Zerg have infested as well as the Critters.

The Clawed One 14:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Concept art is a must: there's some early concept art from 1996 by Metzen that shows completely different Zerg and Protoss designs, that's not on Sons of Storm. Reviews are naturally useful for the reception area. Dig out any old gaming magazines you may have and scour for a review there as well.
I don't think a minor creatures section will be very encylopedic, but we can certainly mention in the intro that these are not the only four races in the universe: in addition to all the ones assimilated by the Zerg, and the wildlife NPC's, the manual states stuff about the Protoss "sharing the fruits of their civilisation with the more advanced races it encountered". However, past a quick note, we don't need much else.
The important thing to remember is that we need to keep plot information down to a bare minimum: the characters and the game articles describe the plot enough (for instance, anything normally said about what Raynor's raiders did is practically the same as what the Raynor article says), we need to talk about how things worked, what they were, rather than what they did, but to keep it brief. And we also need some significant gameplay material for each race without falling into the game guide routine.
Personally, I'm link the articles with a real-world principle to follow: Characters goes with storyline, Species with gameplay and Locations with mapping. That should make sourcing a tiny bit easier to find.
The sandbox is at User:S@bre/Species of StarCraft.
Oh, and Deckiller has left Wikipedia "indefinately", so don't expect much assistance from him. I think David Fuchs may be able to help us if we need it though. -- Sabre 15:11, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
All sounds good. And I completely agree with the Raynor-Raider's thing. We don't need an article on the SoK/Dominion now because Mengsk's section covers it. Bad news about Deckiller too. The Clawed One 15:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Re:Minor Character

Well if possible, portraits, but for some like Adun and Taldarin, substitute concept art maybe. I dunno, honestly. I guess mix and match the two. The Clawed One 14:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: SCL

Nope, we don't know what's going on either, it's been on and off. Sorry. The Clawed One 20:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

SC Sources

I'm not at liberty to say why, but find alternative sources to SCL. The Clawed One 23:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I honestly can't tell you. Sorry, but I'm not allowed to talk about it. The Clawed One 12:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

StarCraft II

Citations need to accurately document source information. They should be treated the same way as quotes. They should generally not be altered to match our MOS or spelling conventions within an article. You wouldn't change a book citation to a different title, would you? --- RockMFR 16:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Xel'Naga

1 intro paragraph, one for the Protoss, one for the Zerg, and a final short one for their legacies. Seems alright for length. As for SCL, at the time it went down I wasn't sure exactly what was going to be lost and for how long, hence my remark. All I knew was that the site was gonna be down for a while and a lot of data could be lost. The Clawed One 21:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think maybe expand the final paragraph a tiny bit to mention their actions with the Sons of Korhal in Episode I, as well as their interactions with the Protoss and the Zerg. Maybe another two or three sentences, not too much though.
As well, sorry I haven't been too active lately, I joined the Final Fantasy Wikia and am doing stuff for them, plus I'm back to school. So I haven't been doing a lot on Wikipedia as of late, just minor stuff. The Clawed One 21:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I think the Zeratul move would be wise. Currently there just isn't a lot on him oou, and it makes sense, he's an alien, Raynor and Kerrigan are human. Game reviewers are more likely to connect to and like them. The Clawed One 12:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
It doesn't matter. Zeratul is one of Starcraft's central characters along with Kerrigan and Raynor. There are plenty of game characters who have their own pages out there on wikipedia and play a central role in their games, and they are not human. Once more information about him is released though and Starcraft 2 is out, a separate article for Zeratul should be created again. And Gamespot DID review Zeratul, as in the Top 10 Heroes list. Haleth
Yes, once he is discussed by other sources more, he, along with any other character who receives such attention, will receive his own article. You misunderstood our reasoning, please pay more attention in the future and do not take our comments our of context. The Clawed One 04:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
What do you think of my take on the society section? The Clawed One 14:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Redudant Categories

I think we need to look at the categories for each species briefly and consider if they're really needed. Currently, the Terran category consists of 2 of your sandboxes, the Infested Terran article (which really needs to go), the Terran article, and Raynor and Kerrigan's articles. The Zerg category is the IT page, the Hybrid Page, and pages for the Cerebrates and the Broods, all of which are horribly in-universe that can easily be merged into the Zerg page. The Protoss consist of only their page, the Hybrid Page, and the page for Talematros.

Really, seeing as how they don't include much and don't have a lot of worthwhile content in what they do link to, I think we need to nominate the categories for deletion and merge/delete/redirect the pages in them because a lot of them have no chance for real-world content. The Clawed One 16:29, 10 October 2007 (UTC)


Your Species of Starcraft article

I recently reduced the history section in the Protoss article, because it was tagged as being a plot summary that was too long. I stumbled across your developing article on the species of Starcraft and wondered if you would be able to use the current history revision in your article. Larrythefunkyferret 00:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Nothing would please me more than to help a developing article. I'll take a look at it and see what I can do. Thank you. Larrythefunkyferret 22:13, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I finished a first run through. I removed a few lines that to me, a StarCraft virgin, seemed trivial. If I'm mistaken in this regard, sorry; feel free to chastise me before you put it back. I summarized a few things, always trying to preserve links and references, especially references. Also, I made a few grammar, spelling and punctuation fixes. I may revisit this, but for now it seems alright to me (I can think of nothing else to add/subtract at the moment). Larrythefunkyferret 23:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I just checked it again, and noticed that the link to incubator in the Xel'Naga sectioin goes to a disambiguation page. I'd like to direct that to a specific article, but am unsure which article it should go to, whether Cryopreservation, Neonatal intensive care unit, or something else was appropriate for it. Since you know more about the incubator in question, I was hoping you would have an idea where it should go. Larrythefunkyferret 00:08, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. If it's an egg, then maybe it should go to Avian incubation, but maybe it would be best to either leave it as it is or remove the link entirely. I will check this article again periodically to see if I can help more. Thank you. Larrythefunkyferret 17:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

About redirect

Why are you doing so? Duran isn't minor character so that article about him should be merged into one single list. If you think that separated articles about characters are not needed, you may discuss it on AFD, but please don't delete them without consensus. Thank you. ru.Media 12:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

It's clear that merging these articles is impossible due to WP:SIZE. There are too many things to be appended about each race. In ruwiki where I mostly participate article about Terrans is already up to 90 kb., the same will be with the English article in future. Merging three articles of this size into one 300kb-article is not very good idea. ru.Media 16:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Future of Zerg

I have read the message you left me on my talk page and I think that I can be pretty sure that User:S@bre/Species of StarCraft is intended to replace Terran (StarCraft), Protoss, and Zerg. I am, however, uncertain why those three subjects are not notable enough for inclusion as they are. They have survived multiple AfDs with the decision to keep. It seems the community's consensus is that the articles are notable enough for inclusion. As you have noticed, I am working on improving Zerg. I intend to get it to good status and then work on the other two and hopefully get them both to good status also. Obviously, merging them would prevent my hope from succeeding. I do not think that merging the three articles would be productive as they have been proven to be notable enough for each to have its own article. I am fine with Xel Naga being taken somewhere else, but I do not see why the three main races must go. I think that combining the three races would prevent Wikipedia from explaining all the necessary information about the three races. I do not think a merge is the correct solution to problems within the race articles. Captain panda 05:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Per your comments on my talk page, I am considering giving up on Zerg and going with your new idea for an article, but I have some questions first. First, what is this real world information that is applicable to a combination of the three races, but not in each individual race. I realize that all of the race articles are lacking in real-world references, but I also notice that your sandbox article does not have real-world references either. In addition, you seemed to suggest that there is an article that consists of real world references to Starcraft. If it exists, where is it? It could be used to inspire real-world references in the other articles. Second, what difference does it make that there are plot sections in each of the three articles? Even if it is an issue, why does just give a very scant listing of the plot or even no plot section at all. I don't think having a too-long plot is reason to axe the articles. Third, haven't the notability concerns for the races been handled in the deletion discussions? Since the articles have been kept, why is that a reason to move? Can't many of these concerns for things like psionic technology, the Xel'Naga, etc. be just combined into an article something like Auxiliary concepts of StarCraft if they even need to be combined at all? Many of the things that you noted as problems with the articles can be fixed simply by cleaning up and improving the articles. There is no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Captain panda 20:07, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Gaaahhhhhh!!!! After a response like that, there is no way I can continue to argue against you! It seems your idea is far better than mine. I guess that I may come and help you with this sandbox article since it seems that your approach is the best choice. Captain panda 01:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Collapsible

Not really sure. I know the templates for {{Halo characters}} shows up collapsed by default; I think that somewhere there's a 'collapsible:yes' or some such function. I would check the navbar code. David Fuchs (talk) 20:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's in the main {{Navbox}} documentation, if you're still interested. David Fuchs (talk) 18:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Response: Brood War

I can check it out, but not at the moment, as it is 11:57PM where I am. I'll look it over tommorrow and see what I can do. Larrythefunkyferret 06:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Finnished. Honestly, I think you did a good job of cutting out the fat; I changed a few things, but nothing major needed to be done to it. Good Job. By the way, if I made any changes that shouldn't have been made (remember, StarCraft virgin), sorry, could you change them back? Thanks. Larrythefunkyferret 07:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Stop reverting my changes to the TF2 page...

Until real proof (from the devs mouths) can be provided that the games inspiration came from "The Incredibles" it should not be in the wiki. As of this moment any speculation that the games inspiration came from "The Incredibles" is rumor, and opinion... not fact.

When you are simply coming along as an anomalous IP address and start removing referenced material, you expect it to be accepted without question? There is an edit summary section at the bottom of the page. I suggest you use it to explain yourself rather than moaning at me, because I'm not the one who will revert such changes without any explanation for the actions what-so-ever. -- Sabre 20:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Cut down plot?

Um, seriously? I just read Starcraft Brood War, and if anything, you need more plot. A paragraph per episode seems like a good length for a summary. A lot of stuff just reeks of "WTF is going on?" In my opinion at least, the article should be explained well enough so that the reader can read through the article in one shot without needing to click on the wikilinks to find out more. Concepts should be explained. Who is Zerg, for instance? Adding in, "Zerg Overmind, the leader of the Zerog Swarm (apparently a race?)" is quick and reinforces the reader's understanding better.

My eyes are glazing over...ugh...I have to resist! I keep running into buzz words all over the place: names of speices, people, etc. that are completely alien to me, dropped in without sufficient context. A cursory glance reveals at least this problem: Zeratul and Artanis in an operation to recover two key crystals, but it never explains what the crystals are for. It goes off on Kerrigan and what she wants to do. if that's reserved for the next episode, mention it first there, or say, "the importance of this operation is not revealed until the next episode.

Anyway...this was rushed, take it as you will. I'll try to read over it again tomorrow and point out more problems. hbdragon88 08:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Question

Can the StarCraft image be used for a userbox? Just wanted to know. --Executor Tassadar 12:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Re

That is a good structure Halo has. I think we should use the sandbox first, but I think it will definitely work. I haven't been working on the SC pages lately, I've been busy with some Yu-Gi-Oh! pages, merging and cleaning up and the like.

Sorry, but I don't do melee play, so I don't know much about actual Terran gameplay. Zerg, I'll take a look at later today. The Clawed One 15:26, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your dogged TF2 editing...

I approve whole-heartedly, and would offer you some sort of barnstar, if I knew how to do it. Keep on rocking. The Great Unwashed 02:51, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

TF2 maps

how can the TF2 map descriptions and screenshots be added? (wikipedia novice) I found them on a Japanese wiki site. However, the Japanese text description of them would obviously have to be translated.

http://wikiwiki.jp/tfortress2/?CP_DUSTBOWL

Re:SC Wikiproject

Look at it now it seems very poorly executed. I don't know, we'll have to see what all they do. I know it's advised not to take ownership for articles, but come on, if it weren't for you and me (mostly you), the SC articles wouldn't be half as good as they are now. The Clawed One (talk) 13:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject StarCraft Concerns?

I am not clear on what you are talking about. I made that WikiProject since I noticed several StarCraft articles and templates on Wikipedia. There is also a Warcraft wikiproject which I think is just as inactive as StarCraft. I also discovered many other video game wikiprojects that are just as inactive. In my opinion, it is due to the fact that people are busy 10 months of the year in the northern hemisphere (specifically teens) which in my opinion is why not many video game articles are edited. --Storkian aka iSoroush Talk 21:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Btw, can you please be in "charge" of the StarCraft wikiproject. like promote the project (NOT aDVERtise) and make some wikiproject required pages etc. I am trying to convince StarCraft wikia into joining this wikiproject. I hope we can be pals because I'm an SC addict (even though I'm noob lol). Perhaps if you have a SC account I will face you.--Storkian aka iSoroush Talk 21:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Also I just made a userbox right now. I hope you will add it to your page =). {{Wikipedia:WikiProject StarCraft/Userbox 1}}
Talk--Storkian aka iSoroush Talk 22:27, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's StarCraft articles. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining the StarCraft WikiProject? It's a group dedicated to improving the overall quality of all StarCraft articles. Here's some project-specific information for you:

If you have any questions, see the help pages, ask at the STARCRAFT project talk page, or feel free to ask me on my talk page.

Re: Opinion on TF2 edit

Hi, happy to help out. I'd say go for it. It's definitely not guide material and is abstracted enough to make it acceptable. With suitable references it should be just fine. The Great Unwashed (talk) 02:02, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

StarCraft

Cool. I've played StarCraft for a while and I consider myself a pretty good Zerg gamer. Need another hand? ;) ♥ Fredil 18:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Removing StarCraft project tags

Errr, what's the deal here? Either a page is relevant to a project or it isn't. If the project is "just getting started" then one would presume it needs all the help it can get from other editors in the form of rounding up applicable articles. Why are you taking tags off of StarCraft-related articles? Chris Cunningham (talk) 19:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

It is because the project is not ready to begin any work that it should not have tags out, and as such it counts as advertising. The fact that the project was created arbitarily without any attempt to inform other editors, let alone get consensus for the need to create such a project, does not help the situation. Until the project is in a position to actually work on articles, or as in this case considering it's lack of pre-discussion if it actually survives, it shouldn't put out tags on the articles, especially when the project's page hasn't even been completed and the full intentions of the project haven't been established. -- Sabre (talk) 19:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is .... ? A democracy!! I know

I know what Wikipedia is, and saying "SC is insignifact to the world" is a bias. That's like saying it's impossible to land on the moon. That kind of talk is not diplomatic and wikipedia is made so that anyone can edit it but on a democratic level. --Storkian aka iSoroush Talk 22:32, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not a bias because there's a million sources for SC's importance. The Clawed One (talk) 01:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Zerg Physiology

Seems good, although saying that the Overmind and Kerrigan command the Zerg in the first sentence and later seems a little repetitive.

I do have one thing to note as well. I'm gonna be buying Shadow Hunters later today, so over the next week as I read it, I'll drop by to note any big info I find. The book is supposed to feature Adun, so there'll likely be new stuff on him and Ulrejaz as well. The Clawed One (talk) 19:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, first new tidbit - Adun wasn't just a random Protoss, he was the Executor of the Templar Caste. It also mentions Adun living around 2000 years after Khas, is that's any help for timelines and such. The Conclave is also stated as the elite Judicators, and they meet at the Khor-shakal - the Great Forum, Aiur's city hall, I suppose you could call it. There's a little scene describing in detail a Protoss funeral, if you want that for anything. The Clawed One (talk) 22:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
No, it's a normal funeral. It consists of Protoss carrying the dead on a floating thing similar to a human march, to an pool filled with rainwater in the ruins of a xel'naga temple. The closest family or friend of the dead wash their body with the water, dress it, and stand guard over it for 24 hours before it is buried.
There is also something else of ginourmous importance, but sadly, you wanted to spoilers, and it's a huge-ass spoiler. Plus, seeing as how the book was released yesterday, I personally wouldn't want to post such information on Wikipedia right away. So far, nothing else really important beyond what I've already said. There's a few other minor things, but they are also spoilers and not entirely irrelevant. The Clawed One (talk) 00:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, right now all we can use for the article is info on Adun and Ulrezaj, but both will be spoilers for the novel. You want the info still? The Clawed One (talk) 20:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I'll add the info. However, I have no idea how to do citations. Could you just type up a citation for Shadow Hunters, and I'll add in the info and the citations? The Clawed One (talk) 22:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh, there is something minor. Before Adun and the whole ordeal with the dark templar, the phrase is "En Taro Khas". So it that's important to mention anywhere, ya know, there it is. The Clawed One (talk) 22:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Jake and Zamara

I think we should add them to the Novels section of minor characters. They're definitely important to the StarCraft mythos thus far, and that section needs to be expanded. Or, maybe we can list them as one entry, and Rosemary under a second. And there's another character who may appear in Book 3, and he should be added if he does appear. The Clawed One (talk) 22:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[1]

There you go. The Clawed One 17:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, check Citation Five on the Minor Characters article, there's something wrong with it. The Clawed One 17:33, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

StarCraft Series

  • The Story arc section could have a better-sounding name. Also, adding in a sentence or two on the UPL and the original purpose of the super-carriers into the first paragraph would better illustrate the reasons for the Terran presence in the sector.
  • Mentioning plot development after the two games through the authorized expansions and the novels might be a good plan.

Otherwise its good, although the Cultural Impact section needs to be expanded more. But you already noted that. The Clawed One 22:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Concerning the lead section: "making it the third best-selling computer game in history, behind The Sims and The Sims 2." I don't think List of best-selling video games should be used as a source, since it is a Wikipedia article and the PC section states "This is an incomplete list of PC games". --Silver Edge 10:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I find no problems with the wording in StarCraft (series) as of this revision. I'll go and change the wording in StarCraft. --Silver Edge (talk) 07:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I Apologize

I appoligize for my attitude and ignorance towards wikipedian policy. I did not mean to get you mad, I just saw a Ted documentary (the one sponsored by BMW) where the founder of Wikipedia stated "Wikipedia is a democracy..." so I assumed he actually meant it. --Storkian aka iSoroush Talk 23:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

StarCraft Template

I really dont appreciate you changing it back, why shouldn't all the articles in teh category go into the template? That isn't all of the information on StarCraft that isn't already in the professional Starcraft gaming template. Its in the category afterall.Judgesurreal777 18:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

StarCraft project move?

Read Talk Page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_StarCraft

im basically saying we should move the sc wikiproject as a sub-wikiproject page of wikiproject video games. (e.g well you know, like how an anime cartoon is a subpage of wikiproject anime)--Storkian aka iSoroush Talk 03:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Half-Life 2: Deathmatch

Can you explain to me how it is unnecessary to inform readers of the article that Half-Life 2: Deathmatch is usually abbreviated HL2DM? I don't quite see your point. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 18:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

The Orange Box

I said "Capitalisation is wrong" because I was agreeing with you and was about to alter it when you reverted me two minutes after I edited... There is nothing in MoS against the use of colour and it looks good to have an orange box in an article about The Orange Box. Why do you want to be 'conventional' when there is nothing that compels one to not use colour? The very fact that colour is allowed in the code shows that there is no wiki taboo about using it. clicketyclickyaketyyak 21:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Of course it doesn't mean it should always used, but if you're going to remove it and revert me the second I insert it back in, you better have a more robust reason. Consensus is decided by discussion, not observation and enforcement. Otherwise, what you interpret accidentally as consensus/guideline/convention could actually just be option/preference. And majority preference does not translate into any sort of enforceable rule. Thank you for reverting your revert. clicketyclickyaketyyak 21:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)