User talk:Spazure

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is Spazure's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Spazure.

Welcome!

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  --Pointe LaRoche 03:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

Contents

[edit] Citing Sources for Entertainers

I'm sure this info is somewhere, but I've been searching for it for days, and none of the wikipages I've found on citing sources give a solid answer one way or another.

I've noticed that on most pages I see for actors or musicians, the filmography or discography, respectively, cite no references whatsoever. Is this simply a case of a large number of people not citing their sources, or do TV shows, movies, and CDs not require a secondary reference because they validate themselves? (i.e. If somebody lists ".. baby one more time" as an album by Britney Spears, anybody could go into a record store and confirm that yes, the album exists). Personally, I'm in favor of secondary sources regardless of if they're required or not, so I'll put them on pages I create -- but I was curious as to whether I should take the time to add these types of citations to existing pages, as well. Spazure 07:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Typically, the idea is that most famous people are notable, and don't really need sourcing for trivial statements about them -- ideally, they should, and you should go ahead and add sources if you see a need. However, it's best to focus on sourcing contentious statements, if you have to source something. Citing "Britney Spears is a female singer" is not as useful as sourcing "Britney Spears was arrested on July 11 2007 for cocaine possession". --Haemo 07:44, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Editor review/spazure

I reviewed you. Shalom Hello 16:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I've also added a couple of thoughts. Espresso Addict 20:54, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lustfaust

Just thought you'd like to know, but according to User:Shii/Hoaxes, Lustfaust is the second-longest lasting hoax article to have been found so far on Wikipedia. Congratulations on spotting it! JulesH 17:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

That's cool, thanks for letting me know! Now I know my contributions are helping, even if I'm only a newbie. Spazure 02:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hakob Sanasaryan

HI I've epxanded Hakob Sanasaryan. I'd have preffered the nominator to expand it -which I would havekindly done rather than going down the AFD route. Hakob is of clear notability ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 09:53, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

No need to tell me. If you'll note at the deletion debate, I voted for keep, and am not the nominator. Spazure 09:56, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sum (Unix)

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Sum (Unix), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Spazure 04:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

As much as I despise impersonal template boxes and the like standardized language, I reshaped the article in question to make it less objectionable. As a side note, there are numerous UNIX utilities already described in Wikipedia and I feel one should not have to argue in defense of including yet another one. While agreeing I have not done the greatest job at making the original Sum (Unix) appealing to the eye, the article was clearly marked as stub and thus inviting others to expand rather than mark for deletion and thus discourage contributions. Please do not take this personally, but as an observation, template boxes on top of each other serve only as ballast and not as an open invitation to improve. Thanks and regards. --Unconcerned 15:56, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfDs and prods

Until further notice, I will no longer be:

  • voting in AfD disccussions (although I'll still be watching them)
  • nominating things for deletion
  • prodding

The reasoning for this is that things I feel should be deleted end up being kept, and vice versa, which means I obviously need a more solid understanding of deletion policy before I can participate in the potential deletion of content without wasting everybody's time.

The caveat here, of course, is that I'll likely be adding wikilinks and references to things that should probably just be deleted. Just don't assume that just because I spend an hour or two working on something that it shouldn't be prodded or sent to AfD -- if you think it does, go for it, I'm just refraining from making such judgement calls myself, and just treating every article as if it belongs to be here. Spazure 04:23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and start voting and/or commenting on AfDs, to help the learning process -- but I'm still not going to nominate or prod anything for at least another couple months. Spazure 05:02, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Concerning your most recent comment to this AfD debate, be aware that feeding trolls will often just provide you with more annoyance. That being said, I have duly warned and rewarned that particular anonymous IP, but he seems to have trouble grasping some basic concepts. It looks as if you've made a pretty good start here, as noted in your editor review, so keep up the good work! —Travistalk 11:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip. I actually spent some time deciding how to respond, and finally decided to completely ignore the personal comments and jump directly to the issue at hand, although I decided that I don't feel strongly enough one way or another to continue to "argue my side" in the debate, so I'm just going to let consensus and wiki policy itself dictate how that goes. Spazure 12:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


Spazure wrote:

"The reasoning for this is that things I feel should be deleted end up being kept, and vice versa, which means I obviously need a more solid understanding of deletion policy before I can participate in the potential deletion of content without wasting everybody's time."
  • Can I just say that that is the most mature, responsible attitude I've ever seen in response to an AfD outcome. Bravo to you sir! —gorgan_almighty 16:31, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! Spazure 02:19, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Ernies -- notable or not ?

{{helpme}} I'm not entirely certain that The Ernies meets WP:MUSIC. I want to work on and expand the article, but I want to make sure it's worth cleaning up and expanding before I put any more work into it.

They have a former member that was also in Jimmie's Chicken Shack at one point, but until I can verify it by a reliable third party source (I only know it to be true because I met him and witnessed him playing with the band for a while), I can't use that for WP:MUSIC#C2. I assumed WP:MUSIC#C1 would apply, but when I made a good-faith effort over the course of a week to get some good sources, I couldn't find any that could be considered non-trivial & reliable. Since they only had a single album release on a major record label, and their previous indie lable isn't notable enough, they fail WP:MUSIC#C5.

This leaves us with WP:MUSIC#C10, which seems to be a bit of a grey area, because they haven't been a major TV theme or anything -- although their music has been in lots of television commercials, a movie, and a video game. This may have potential for WP:IGNORE, but I worry that I only feel that way because I'm a fan -- and thus if I try to invoke WP:IGNORE on my own, I'd be violating WP:NPOV in making that decision.

These leaves us only with WP:MUSIC#C7, which again I know to be true, but the only sources I could cite that would show this never come outright and say "this is one of the most notable bands in this area". The only possible source I could think of to use to show meeting this criteria is Punchline, a local weekly "scenester" paper that is now-defunct, and has no archives online. Actually, come to think of it, I'm almost positive there's been an article in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, but as it doesn't seem to have older articles archived online either, the only way I could get any of that info would be to drive to Richmond and hope to find archives in the local library.

[edit] Summary

In short, it appears that The Ernies clearly fail all notability guidelines currently, unless one of the following occurs:

  1. Some unknown person who may or may not exist happens to dig up some old copies of Punchline and/or RTD and cites info to meet WP:MUSIC#C7 (not particularly likely, but possible given WP:There is no deadline)
  2. Derrick Dorsey (formerly of Jimmie's Chicken Shack gives an interview somewhere that mentions he used to be in The Ernies
  3. Group concensus decides that the BASEketball Soundtrack (Mojo Records, contains a track by The Ernies & Meson Ray (Mojo Records, full album) count for WP:MUSIC#C5
  4. Group consensus decides that the tv commercials, being played in the background during a scene in BASEketball, and having a video on Tony_Hawk's_Pro_Skater is good enough for WP:MUSIC#C10

All thoughts welcome, and I'm not going to fight for one position or another, but I would like to see enough comments so that something resembling a consensus could be assumed -- at which point I would act on it. (ie: Please don't turn off the helpme tag for at least a couple days, I want more than one person to respond.)

Thanks in advance!!! --Spazure 13:47, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I´m thw1309. You should ask this question on the talkpage of Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians. I am no expert on musicians but I think that a group, which comes so close to so many different criterias, should comply with the requirements of WP:MUSIC. --Thw1309 14:21, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Ahh, there's an idea. I almost put it on requests for feedback, but didn't think it really applied, almost put it on afd, then realized it'd be silly to nominate something "just in case" it "might" need to be deleted, so I defaulted to my userpage for lack of ideas. I went ahead and cross-posted there --Spazure 15:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Just to throw in an independently involved user's two cents, I'd AfD the article, at best, if not place {{db-music}} on it. —« ANIMUM » 17:31, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

They survived AfD, good enough for me! spazure (contribs) 05:41, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 2

Thank you for your support in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! If you ever have any questions or suggestions for me, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best wishes, --Elonka 03:38, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smile

Thank you! Pedro |  Chat  09:11, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

I replied on my talk page Ariel♥Gold 08:57, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Block on User_talk:75.21.187.140

Fixed it about 20 minutes later. Good catch :) BTW - as a non-admin, it's perfecly okay to make good-faith edits to stuff like block messages where there's been some obvious error. Be bold! - Alison ☺ 22:34, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, good to know. Thanks! spazure (contribs) 05:00, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spells in Harry potter

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

[edit] Guess what day it is?

Ariel♥Gold gives you a huge smile, just because it is Monday!!
Smiles promote WikiLove, and hopefully hers has made your day better! ({{subst:smile}})

Ariel♥Gold 11:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Silly bot! I was testing the bot, and it warned me! lmao

Hee hee, I was helping to test the bot. Too funny, bot even leaves messages. Ariel♥Gold 07:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

That's about what I said! spazure (contribs) 07:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Replied on my talk page ~*Grin*~ Ariel♥Gold 07:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Spaz rocks! -funky49 18:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About the hard drive thing

Yes lol. I remind my friends every now and again when they ask me "how much x is in y?" 75.45.127.145 08:13, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Starlight (song)

Since you seem to be one of the most prolific editors on Muse related articles (at least, on Muse (band)), I was wondering if you could take a quick look at this, and tell me what it's missing/if there's anything of relevance that is missing. I've been working on it for a few days, and want to send it to GA soon, but this is the first song/Muse article I've worked on extensively, so I'm not sure what they require :) Thanks, Giggy\Talk 06:06, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, all I did on Muse was revert vandalism and entering of obviously untrue information, I know nothing about the band or their songs, sorry. spazure (contribs) (review) 06:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Oops, my bad. I saw you on the Muse talk page and thought you were active there...obviously not the case :) Giggy\Talk 07:40, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
No problem, it was a simple mistake. I just didn't want to go "yeah, looks good", only to find out later something was glaringly wrong and I just didn't know because I don't know the band, lol. spazure (contribs) (review) 07:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anti-vandal

Between you and Cluebot, I almost never have to revert anything. Patrolling RC still makes for some interesting reading though, so I'll always be one step behind you. Please don't back up too quickly or you might smush me against a wall. ;) spazure (contribs) (review) 09:37, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

LOL! I really laughed when I read this...! Then I felt guilty for not allowing you to have many vandals to revert... :( Ach, and don't even talk about Cluebot...!  ;) Nice to have you onboard the vandal-patrol train! Normally, there are so many vandals, there's no way to keep up...must be slow lately! Let me know next time you're patrolling, mebbe we can form a team... Dreadstar † 17:55, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I've started ignoring the obvious blanking vandals altogether since the bot grabs those, and looking for the harder-to-notice stuff like replacing the word "communist" with "terrorist" (which happens really freakishly often, the past couple days), or the random adds of "zomg hi!" to the end of paragraphs and stuff. I'll send you a msg next time I'm on the job, we'll see what we can do. spazure (contribs) (review) 23:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for defending me on those appparently good faith edit reversions...I responded to the anon user with some detail on what happened and why. Dreadstar † 03:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

He then nicely asked for more detail, so I gave him a lot to review...;) Dreadstar † 05:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

When vandal-fighting, I sometimes run into issues such as this diff, where I go to a user's talk page and they've been warned a lot, but a lot of time has gone by, so it doesn't qualify to report to WP:AIV. Is there any recourse for persistant vandal IPs that vandalize over long periods of time like this, or do we simply have to keep warning them with empty threats per the current policy? --spazure (contribs) (review) 08:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

That's a very good question. It probably depends on the blocking admin, here is one that got an indefinite block for being a 'vandal only account', but this one did vandalize after being recently warned. I'd probably watch it for a while (coupla days), and if nothing happened, drop it. On the other hand, it couldn't hurt to report it and let an admin decide, just say it in the report - appears to be a vandal-only account that periodically vandalizes every few months. If there were more vandalism edits or a shorter time between "events", I wouldn't hesitate...but that one..I dunno...I'd probably warn then watch.. Dreadstar † 08:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
I'll just keep an eye on him for now, then. The nature of the prior edits (I researched some more) does lead me to believe that perhaps it's a shared ip and several different people have vandalized different articles. Even the two attacks on Happy Feet from that IP seem different enough in nature to potentitally be different people. So, good idea, I'll just watch for now, but keep it in mind for future cases. spazure (contribs) (review) 08:57, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Astral Projection

Thanks! I'm glad you like it. I'm almost finished with my part of it, as others are better able to put in more information. I'll probably just drop by to keep it NPOV and help with the sources. –––Martinphi (Talk Ψ Contribs) 21:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I hereby award you this for your thoughtful teamwork and outstanding anti-vandalism efforts! Dreadstar † 00:52, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
My pleasure! Well deserved award! (heck, I don't even have one of these yet....;) Dreadstar † 04:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Thanks!

Ah it's no problem, I was doing an assignment on irrational numbers and well... stumbled upon the food reference :) Insanity13 06:51, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

You snuck one in on me! Wow! I guess my hint worked...lol..! Thanks, man..I really appreciate it. We both do hard work protecting the 'pedia, it's nice to receive recognition. Yours is well deserved!

Now, can I interest you in a Norwegian Blue? Lovely plumage..! Dreadstar † 04:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Glad to see GGWO calmed down...guess my advice sucked, eh? Thank goodness for Seeker0242117...hopefully it won't start up again. Dreadstar † 07:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh I was going to go with your advice, it just required time I haven't had available recently (just got a promotion, so work is kind of crazy -- and remember I mostly wiki from work). Seeker was definitely a blessing though, now I get to play around with warcraft and linux articles. ;-) spazure (contribs) (review) 07:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Cool. My work has been keeping me busy too... Next time, I'll step in directly to help ya out...(well, if you want me to)..always happy to help a good fellow-editor out! Dreadstar † 13:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ann Wilson

Greetings!

I have been experiencing a range of emotions in response to your edit. The prevailing one is: "I am puzzled". (i.e. Why did you do it?)

On 11 Sept, Anne Wilson will release her first solo album. I don't know what the time is where you are, but it will be 3 Sept here soon. So that's in about a week. The link's been there since 23 August, and it clearly says that it's there as a temporary link.

Further WP:EL says: "This page in a nutshell: Adding external links can be a service to our readers, but they should be kept to a minimum of those that are meritable, accessible and appropriate to the article."

In my no-doubt-highly-biassed opinion, that's exactly what this link is.

You say: (rm advert spam to myspace link in violation of WP:EL)

Well, it probably doesn't surprise you to read that I don't agree. In my no-doubt-highly-biassed opinion, it ain't spam, it ain't an advert, and it ain't in violation of WP:EL

Further, before I put it there, I asked an expert:

Sorry to bother you, but I expect that you would know the answer ...
I gather that it's a no-no to link to myspace and you tube.
Can you point me at the explanation of why this is the case?
Many thanks, Pdfpdf 11:28, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I wouldn't say MySpace and YouTube are completely banned, but they are user-generated and score very low as sources. It's not authoritative for anything. The only exception would be the MySpace page of someone already known for other reasons, or YouTube content generated by such a person. I find it very hard demonstrating notability for internet phenomena; mention in the mainstream press is about the minimum crition I can think of.
The relevant policy is WP:RS (and WP:V) and WP:CITE and WP:EL. JFW | T@lk 16:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Ta. Pdfpdf 22:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, in the text of the page I put:

Temporary entry: < !-- Rewrite this bit when album has been released - i.e. 2007/9/11 -- >
Currently, (August 2007), previews of "Immigrant Song" and "Where to now St. Peter" can be heard on Ann Wilson's "official" http://www.myspace.com/officialannwilson myspace page.
< !-- Can anyone confirm/deny if this really is her "official" page? -- >

So, in my no-doubt-highly-biassed opinion, I went to considerable effort on this entry.

I'm going to "assume good faith", and assume that you read all of my text entry, asume that you understood perfectly what I thought I was saying (yes, I know, that's probably a rash assumption), and assume that you reverted it for a good reason.

My problem is, I can't even guess what your "good reason" is.

Hence, I'm puzzled.

Can you enlighten me please?

Thanks in anticipation of your reply. Cheers, Pdfpdf 13:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, it was rather simple. The link to Astrid Young's myspace isn't allowed on her wiki page due to WP:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided, so I figured if one artist (one that even occasionally collaborates with her, for that matter) shouldn't have her myspace page (which i've confirmed through emails with her) linked, Ann shouldn't, either (especially if we're not even sure it's "really" an official site). Apparently there's something going on similar to WP:WAX where Ann's myspace page is acceptable and Astrid's isn't, but it isn't something that bothers me enough to spend time researching to figure out why. In any case, I won't revert your myspace links again, and I apologize for any inconvenience I may have caused. spazure (contribs) (review) 07:53, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it was a rather simple (and logical) reason, wasn't it. Thank you. I am no longer puzzled.

Regarding Astrid's situation vs Ann's situation, I'd say Ann's page satisfies WP:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided point 1. viz:

Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article.

As Ann's myspace is allowing free download of what would otherwise be copyright files, (no WP article could do that without WP:copyvio), it is "providing a unique resource".
However, I'm surprised Astrid's myspace doesn't, in some way, "provide a unique resource", so it beats me why a link to Astrid's myspace is a no-no.
Best Wishes, Pdfpdf 12:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Git lecture

It's within the first ten-twenty minutes. He gives a lecture on why he created it in the first place, I'll skim through it and see if I can find it for you. --lucid 12:36, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, just found it. 9:51. spazure (contribs) (review) 12:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Damn, just as I was about to tell you :p --lucid 12:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
He also said I was ugly and stupid and should be locked up because I like CVS, lol. Now I'm going to have to find a free hour some day soon to sit and see what the fuss is about. More to the point though, should we mention the time in the cite somewhere to make it easier to verify for other folks that come across it as well? spazure (contribs) (review) 12:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
That works. :) spazure (contribs) (review) 12:57, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Like he said, he's got strong opinions :p --lucid 13:00, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GGWO

Just to let you know, I've replied on the article's talk page! I'm in the military, adn can't reply often! Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 22:12, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

How's it going with this thing? I decided to take a more direct hand in it. [1]. Dreadstar † 22:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Looking better to me, but I have so little time for Wiki the past week or so I haven't had a chance to do any detailed review of .. much of anything. spazure (contribs) (review) 07:16, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


The Invisible Barnstar
Thank you for your continued work and assistance on Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles, referencing and generally cleaning up articles that have needed attention for a long time. Your good work goes unseen unless someone disagrees ;) Jeepday (talk) 13:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Super Mario RPG lists

Currently, Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars has two lists pertaining to it (List of characters in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars, and List of locations in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars). User:TTN decided it would be best to merge the lists into the main article and split Smithy Gang into those articles. I recently merged Smithy Gang into the list of chatacters by removing the non-notable characters, and I have asserted that a cameo section in the list of characters is valid, per Wikipedia:Trivia sections and Wikipedia:Handling trivia that uses Alex Trebek#Cameos as a good example. I have suggested that we rename the articles per Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting potentially controversial moves to something along the lines of Characters of Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars and World of Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars or Mushroom Kingdom (Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars) just like Characters of Final Fantasy VIII and World of Final Fantasy VI or Gaia (Final Fantasy VII). I believe if these articles are to evolve beyond a non-notable list, they should be renamed. For example, List of Final Fantasy VII locations was merged into Gaia (Final Fantasy VII), because a World article is notable, but a simple list of locations is not. That is why there are other secions of the article to make it a World article. It simply has not been renamed yet.

TTN believes the citations in the development and reception sections of the list of locations, books and magazines, are trivial sources. When I added that the 3D perspective of the game is reminicent of Equinox to the main article, TTN removed it since my souce was "the opinions of the Nintendo Power player's guide writers". Although it was actually Nintendo Power magazine, I do believe a magazine is a reliable source, and I gave a page from Next Generation Magazine which also said the same thing. In addition, I was surprized that TTN said that it was from the players guide, since he claims to own the players guide for the game. He has not verified this, since I asked him for citations in May, "Could you look in the back of the Player's Guide and tell me what “types” of … Magic? I forgot what they call it in the game … well, anyways, what types of Special Attack or whatever it is (actually, could you find out what it's called?) there are? I remember some vaguely when I owned the guide like “Fire”, “Jump”, “Electricity?”, etc. Could you provide a citation, like the page number with a quote in context?" TTN replied that he was going to "get to it" (User talk:TTN/Archive 5#List of locations in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars). TTN claims the player's guide is "at the bottom of a box that's behind at least five others in a cramped space". Seeing that TTN did not recognize that the page was not from the player's guide when I provided a scan of the page in question from Nintendo Power shocked me. However, I have continued to assume good faith by not questioning TTN's honesty.

Per Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus can change, I have offered five different reasonable, temporary compromises that might integrate my idea with TTN's.

  1. Go over the list of characters so we can delete non–notable characters
  2. Rename the articles by following the steps at Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting potentially controversial moves.
  3. Cut down the geography section list of locations by cutting it into the regional maps the adventures use when traveling from one to another. I can get pictures and write the fair use rationals, and someone can cut down the text that has no citation and does not allude to other media.
  4. Write the concept and creation and reception sections for the list of characters
  5. Write the concept and creation section for the main article

TTN rejected my compromise because it still keeps the articles. I agreed I would consider a redirect, but Wikipedia:Article size does not allow that, since the list of locations is currently 82 KB long. Instead, I agreed to help cut down the geography section that is the bulk of the article, but TTN rejected that as well because TTN states, "I am not interested in working on the article in regards to improving it." and "get past this "having sources automatically means that this information is good" mentality." TTN states, "I don't think they have or will ever assert notability." I have replied with, "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so if you don't think the articles will ever assert notability, we cannot yet know this, per Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#I don't like it.

Would you please take a look at Talk:Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars and give us your thoughts? Taric25 01:42, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 399 to go

We are almost done, Category:Articles lacking sources from June 2006 is down to less the 400 articles to find references for. I would like to thank you for listing yourself as a volunteer at Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles and would like to take this opportunity to invite you to visit the project again and work on getting the last few articles referenced. We started with 5,572 and we are in the home stretch, please come and try to do a couple a day and we can finish it up in no time. Jeepday (talk) 02:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Focus at Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles

The Invisible Barnstar
Thank you for your continued work and assistance on Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles, referencing and generally cleaning up articles that have needed attention for a long time. Your good work goes unseen unless someone disagrees ;) Jeepday (talk) 11:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The huge set of unreferenced articles from June of 2006 is finally completed. Thank you for your contributions. The new focus at Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles is Category:Articles lacking sources from July 2006 which as of May 28 is only 1,322 articles and should go much quicker. Thank you to everyone who has contributed and listed themselves as a volunteer. Jeepday (talk) 11:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)