User talk:Steerpike/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Contents

Shinobi Sequel Notes

Did you delete the Shinobi sequel notes? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cube b3 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

Yes I did, because the section was mostly speculation on the future of the series. Unless this can be sourced it's just personal reflection. If you really want to share this it belongs more on the discussion page. Cheers. --Steerpike 21:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi, received your reply. I'm sorry about the mix-up, but we really have no better way of warning people. The only other solution would be to immediately block anybody who makes a bad edit, and most of those people aren't vandals, they're just testing. Even that measure would still catch innocents, because IP addresses change. Generally, the system works pretty well. Anyway, here are a few tips:

Good luck, Meelar (talk) 12:57, 2004 Jul 28 (UTC)

Cradle of Filth tourdates

Would you please erase the tour dates on the Cradle of Filth page? I believe they are silly. Why should people need to know the tour dates? There are other web sites for that. It's an enclycopedia. Thanks. I would but my computer is down. Helena Rayne 14:47, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

I removed them yesterday ;) --Steerpike 16:32, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

List of songs with titles that do not appear in the lyrics

I think you archived this discussion (for deletion) a little too soon. And what's more, I don't think the people who voted to keep the page offered any coherent reasoning as to why we should keep the page. Purely in numbers there were more who voted to keep it yes, but look at the arguments. At least those who voted for deletion argued a strong case. I'm tired of this issue being constantly side-stepped. NO-ONE has yet offered a sound argument as to HOW this list can be useful. "Yeah somebody did a lot of work on it, we should keep it", "it's factual and neutral",... bollocks. It's one of the most trivial pages on Wikipedia. Not too mention it's got numerous problems with categorizing. (instrumentals are excluded, translations are included, descriptive song titles are excluded, slight deviations are included, etc etc...) The page is a mess. Common :( --Steerpike 09:13, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

  • First, the debate had been on the AFD page for the required five days, and therefore the closure was not premature. Regarding the decision to "keep", I might say that vote count is not the only thing which matters when I make the decision of whether to keep or delete, but it does remain a major factor, and I will usually look for a two-thirds majority for deletion, sometimes higher. Here we had something like 10 to 12 keep votes versus 6 delete votes. I can only call "delete" decisions when there is a consensus to do so, and a 12k-6d is by itself clear indication that there is no such consensus. I can and do make judgment calls when the decision is more borderline, with the vote count on or around a two-thirds majority for deletion, a count which shows something like 60%-80%. But I think that closing this debate as a "delete" with 10-12 "keep"s against 6 "delete"s would be inappropriate, even though the keep votes were of the short, and not very detailed "keep, it's verifiable" type. Regarding the "useful" thing, I can't come up with a good explanation for that, but I suppose some song lovers find this kind of trivia interesting. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:26, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Revenge of Shinobi Storyline

Hey there,

The "storyline" you put in seems like the text from the intro screen. This is cool except that I'm not sure if it's completely legal. Also, it's a bit verbose anyways. I think you had the right idea when you had the short summary in your earlier revision. If you could do something like that for the intro text, that would be great.Krymson 04:16, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

It's paraphrased from the manual mostly. But perhaps I should add the tag like I did with Sonic 2. Btw I have been working on various Shinobi articles lately. I'm trying to create a more structured overview of the game. Yesterday I made the Shinobi series page (still under construction). That should cover the most important aspects of the games, as well as providing a useful portal to all the titles in the series --Steerpike 10:13, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Image CSD

Image:Tailsadventure.gif was marked by you as a CSD as an inferior copy of another image. I cannot find this image. I removed the tag—if you can find the image in question please tag it again with a link to the redundant image. — Phil Welch 04:25, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Okay it's not a "real" duplicate, but I replaced the image with a better version on the Tails Adventures page. (Image:Tails_Adventures_Box.jpg) I would have simply updated the first picture but they are different file types, and I couldn't convert the jpg to gif without loss of quality. Doesn't Wikipedia encourage the use of jpg over gif anyway over large images? Besides that, I think it's just a better image to use because it's larger and more detailed. --Steerpike 11:16, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Image:Sonic & Friends.gif

Hi. About Image:Sonic & Friends.gif and Image:Sonic the Hedgehog Poster.jpg, where did this image come from? We're trying to make Sonic the Hedgehog a good article, but all images on the page must be properly tagged to do this. Thanks. --Jtalledo (talk) 16:12, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

The image Sonic & Friends was (promotional) artwork for Sonic Advance, and likewise, the Sonic the Hedgehog poster comes from the 8 bit version of Sonic the Hedgehog. I used to have one just like that hanging in my room. The image in question however came from a Sonic fansite that used it as a wallpaper. That's about all the info I can give. --Steerpike 02:42, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Praise

Steerpike, thank you for your great work on articles about fairy tales, particularly those about the tales of Hans Christian Andersen. I'm not into awarding barnstars, but I commend you for being a true V.R.M.G.J. (Voice of Reason, Moderation and Good Judgment) on Wikipedia. Happy Holidays! (or whatever it's called) --Bwiki 18:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you! It's been a while since I've worked on the fairy tales project. I was striving to standardize the general outline of each article as much as possible (plot synopsis, origins, analysis, etc...) but once I realised what an amount of fairy tales I was up against I kinda laid it to rest. I'm hoping to include more stories on Wikipedia in the future but I currently haven't got the strength to start it. Thanks again for your comment. --Steerpike 19:55, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Petition

Hi, I was just wondering if you would like to sign this petition. It's a petition for getting the original voice actors back for the Sonic games (instead of the Sonic X voice actors). 71.105.13.135 01:38, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

eh, ok. --Steerpike 10:54, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! :) --anon

Tomb Raider links

hello steerpike...
you have written me a message about my Tomb Raider site with regards to relevance of where i have posted the link to. My site includes EVERY GAME synopsis,characters,cheats,locations,images,etc. This is why i have linked my RELEVANT site in all the Tomb Raider categories because my site is extensive and does contain info about ALL the games and Movies. If you would take the time to visit my site you will see it is extensive. Perhaps you can come up with a suggestion for a link, as it is impossible to post exteral links to all these sections as they are all at different locations on the site. My site is relevant to all the categories i have put it in, and it is a quality site This type of thing is not http://marriage.about.com/od/entertainmen1/p/bradpitt.htm but still this remains as a notable link. This page is a link that is not at all good but is obviously "notable" because lots of people have visited it. Just because the traffic is high for that site doesn't mean to say it is quality. How on earth do you expect people to use Wikipidea with a view to learning if you are going to take off information they are looking for? I feel as if i am being penalised for using the facilities of Wikipedia. Why have an external links page if you are going to take vital information off. www.codename-croft.com

Hi. My concern was that you were simply adding those links to advertise your website. I did actually browse through it but I couldn't immediately find said sections about "game help". I just see no point in adding "the same link" on every Tomb Raider game page. What I much prefer is something, for example, like this:

That way I *am* linking to the same site but to specific sections of it, which seems more useful to me. I'm not against people adding external links (please do so!) but the Tomb Raider pages are periodically swamped with them. Someone recently put a link to a Tomb Raider Legend website on every game page. I'm trying to weed out the unneccessary ones as much as possible. I'm not pretending to be a moderator. The Wikipedia is, after all, free to edit for anyone. But my reasons for deleting your links were fair enough, in my opinion. Feel free to add them back under a more specified form. Cheers. --Steerpike 17:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Your message

Your main points were:

  • A short synopsis is fine, but should be written in the present tense. Nitpicking perhaps but if *you* wanted to get this done right then it's best to get it right completely.
  • To take Bluebeard as an example, I see you've edited out this sentence "Anne, sister Anne, do you see anyone coming?". Perhaps you feel this has no place in a synopsis but I *do* feel it has a place in this article. It *is* the most famous sentence from this fairy tale, which is why it is even mentioned. Be careful what you're axing out.
  • Look we can discuss analysis endlessly, and what is NPOV and what not. Yeah sure I agree some of it sounds a bit too much like someone's random opinion, however a lot of it is actually true but simply unreferenced. For example you edited out the comparison between Bluebeard and Henry VIII but you are wrong to think it is misplaced. Type it in Google and you'll see. Sometimes it's more worthwhile to try and source included analysis than simply editing it out. And another thing, simply observing "The Little Match Girl" deals with poverty and afterlife does not constitute "original research". Do I have to reference a reputable source if I want to observe an apple is green as well?
  • Why do you think that synopses should be in the present tense?

As far as I can remember present tense is the preferred style for a synopsis. See for example here

Preferred by whom? It's not a general preference. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh it's NOT a general preference? You seem to have some advanced knowledge of general preference here so perhaps you can back up your claim with an academic source?

I think that the burden of proof rests with the person who makes the positive claim.
  • Its fame is not an objective matter — but in any case, famous lines should be mentioned in the main article if at all, not in a synopsis.

That's what I said: in the main article. Fame is a perfectly valid reason to include sentences, and even entire articles on Wikipedia. Should we leave out "To be or not be" from Hamlet then?

If you included every famous line from Hamlet you'd have to quote nearly the whole play...

Just an example to illustrate my point.

In fact, though, I don't see any harm in not mentioning the line "To be, or not to be" in an artcile on Hamlet.
  • My own view is that some of the analysis is tendentious at best, and riddled with dsputable theory — but if it's not cited, it can't stay. Again, I encourage you to read Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

I am well aware of most Wikipedia guidelines and policies thank you!

Then I don't understand how you could think that that "analysis" was acceptable.
As for its dealing with poverty and the afterlife, that's already clear from the synopsis — how does it constitute analysis? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:14, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

My point was: sometimes analysis doesn't need to be referenced because it's pretty much clear from the text. But no, I suppose I should reference some academic schmuck who wrote a 10-page thesis on it? Even if some of the themes present in these fairy tales can be analysed by 6-year olds. But whatever. You're right yadayadayada. Cleaning up is nice but actually looking for a decent analysis and sourcing it is a lot nicer.

Frankly I stopped caring about it last night. I don't care if Bluebeard is compared to Papa Smurf now. --Steerpike 21:57, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

What seems obvious to you looks like theory-laden drivel to someone else, and probably vice versa. And quoting someone who said it doesn't really help; I don't see that it's appropriate for an encyclopædia article at all, but if it were to be included, youd have to include whatever disagreements there were (and I can't believe that there aren't any). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

You will notice a slightly hostile attitude in my replies here, and that's because I'm in the midst of a little Wikipedia crisis. The best thing is to not carry this argument any further now before I suffer a complete meltdown. Rest assured I won't tire myself with any editwars on those fairy tale articles. --Steerpike 23:27, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I've just reached the final comment; I'll not respond further then. I hope that we can return to this discussion at some later date. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

AFD

Hi, you may remember that you voted to delete List_of_non-instrumental_songs_with_titles_that_do_not_appear_in_the_lyrics but the AFD failed, well the list has grown even more and is now completely unmanageable, so I have nominated it again - just thought I'd let you know. TH 15:14, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


Image Tagging Image:Sonic the Hedgehog Poster.jpg

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Sonic the Hedgehog Poster.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images 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. ReyBrujo 18:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Eh, I uploadeded this a while back. I can't remember where I got it and I'm too lazy to look it up. Can't say I really care about it anymore too. You can remove it if you want. --Steerpike 00:00, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Tomb_Raider_2_Editor.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Tomb_Raider_2_Editor.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Tagging of orphaned fair use images

Hi Steerpike! When tagging orphaned fair use images for deletion, please use {{orfud}} instead of {{db}}, because current policy is to wait 7 days before the image is deleted (in case it was maliciously orphaned by a vandal). Just write {{subst:orfud}} on the image page, and we sysops will take care of it after 7 days. Thanks for your help! Kimchi.sg 12:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok no problem! --Steerpike 18:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

sonic 3

The trivia section already contains lots obscure trivia, like Michael Jackson’s alleged involvement with the soundtrack and things like sonic 3 is the only game not to start with a “hill” zone. I believe my additions to the page are both interesting and valuable to the sonic community, but I’d say you are right about the comments only really serving an interest to the die-hard sonic fans. If my additions are really unnecessary can you tell me how I go about adding a new section to the sonic page? This way my comments aren’t regarded as traiva and could be called “points of intrest for the sonic die hard fan”, as I am still unsure of how to use Wikipedia.

Cheers Megamef

I don't know if they even have a place on Wikipedia, but it's difficult to assess. Strictly speaking, Wikipedia is NOT a site for diehard fans. The problem is, sometimes a fan writes an excellent article on a subject that is actually supremely trivial. Should we axe it or not? Fans move in, the page expands, and soon related articles appear.
Let's take Star Wars as an example. Wikipedia is not a Star Wars site. But fans will do their best to make it one. It starts with a general article, then an article on each character, then an article on minor characters, an article on starships, an article on locations, etc. etc.,... Some even with their own trivia section. Then the trivia section grows until at last trivia become new articles. So you see, once this thing is set in motion there's not telling where we'll end. The fact that a lot of articles on Wikipedia contain obscure subject matter does not mean we have to swamp every one with them.
In this case, I can't see why inclusion of either is warranted. Perhaps they have a place in Wikibooks, but to the casual reader interested in Sonic 3, they are of no use. There are more specialised sites to gather that sort of info on. As much as we all love the old Sonic games, Wikipedia, is after all, just an encyclopedia. --Steerpike 21:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

About your edit to Sonic 3: rv - too detailed

You reverted the information, saying it is too detailed, yet the Sonic 1 article has small section for each zone. What's wrong with expaining knuckle's appearances and the transitions between levels? Sonic3KMaster(talk) 20:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC) I pose the same questions for your edits to Sonic & Knuckles. Sonic3KMaster(talk) 20:59, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

You're right, the Sonic the Hedgehog 1 entry is also too detailed. I was working on an overhaul for that page but have put it on hold for a while. I don't mean to be pedantic but a lot of people get carried away with these video game articles. You should always keep in mind that Wikipedia is read by a wide variety of people, not just game fans. The casual reader is probably interested in the gameplay, the storyline or the production of the game first. Nobody really cares whether Eggman turns blue in Flying Battery, or Knuckles uses a lever to blow Sonic over Mushroom Hill. I think level descriptions should be short and to the point. Level transitions are really of minor interest here.
There are a ton of websites on the internet to give that sort of info. This is after all an encyclopedia, not a walkthrough. However, seeing as I've been involved in an edit war or two lately, I've been planning to give up on these pages entirely in the near future. Frankly I'm fed up with babysitting on them. No offense to you. --Steerpike 23:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Nevermind then, I agree that the Sonic 1 zone's section is too long. I thought that length was the goal of other Sonic articles, so I added some stuff. Good point, there are a better places to get the zone specific information, like GameFAQs :P. Sonic3KMaster(talk) 23:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Image details: Image:Sonic Scrap Brain.png

Re Image:Sonic Scrap Brain.png: Could you add some more detail? I was trying to disambiguate the "Sonic the Hedgehog" disambiguation page, but your image merely points to the dab page, and I can't figure out which one it should point to (one of the handheld ones? A blurry shot of the 8-bit game, or maybe the Genesis game?). -- Gwern (contribs) 02:10, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

The Genesis game, that is, the 16-bit version. You can see it at the bottom of the page, where it says "pages linking to this file: Sonic the Hedgehog (16-bit)". --Steerpike 12:02, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Incidentally, did you borrow your username from the Gormenghast novels? -- Gwern (contribs) 17:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Of course :) --Steerpike 18:48, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Sonic Trivia

That's all well and good, but this is an encyclopedia, is it not? I'll give you that there are quite a few times when people put up stuff that isn't really worth mentioning, but just because you feel it's "getting out of hand" doesn't mean you need to torch good, interesting information, because you have some arbitrary limit of how much trivia you think there needs to be on the page. I think you'd have a heart attack if you ever saw the amount of information I put into the trivia sections for Sonic Adventure and Sonic Adventure 2. But, most of it is pretty noteworthy, regardless of how of it much there is. And that's what's important, I think. If you feel there is weasel wording, change how it's written - but information like, for example, the King Kai planet thing? That came from the Sonic Jam official Japanese Strategy guide - written personally by Sonicteam members. It contains a boatload of neat information that you cannot find on any Sonic fansite right now, as only a few individuals actually have the guide and even fewer can translate what it says. Therefore that's essentially official information; all you need to do is get rid of the so-called "weasel words". BlazeHedgehog 09:15, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry but this line of reasoning is completely wrong. It's not my job to clean up after people who neglect to cite sources. I cut it out, simple as that. And even if it was sourced, a lot of these trivia are exactly what they are: trivial. The whole idea runs contrary to the concept of an encyclopedia. See, I don't mind the odd bit of info here and there but when trivia sections take up the space of an entire article something is wrong. I've found that video game articles are especially prone to fall victim to this. Let me just repeat myself: Wikipedia is NOT a walkthrough, a fan guide or a trivia dump. The article on Sonic Adventure is all of these things. I wish people would take a cue from Sonic the Hedgehog 3, which is short and to the point. Always imagine a casual reader with no (or minimal) knowledge of the topic at hand. What would they want to know? Most likely: the storyline, some technical specifications, how the game looks and plays and critical opinions. What each level looks like, exactly which characters are playable or what superpowers they gain are really of little interest.
Now to get back to what you were saying: "a boatload of information you cannot find on any Sonic fansite right now". Maybe so, but that's exactly what Wikipedia isn't: a fansite. Now regardless, I'm sure some of the stuff that was/has been/is added is of informational value, but I cannot stress this enough: please try to work into the appropriate section of the article or create a new subsection. If I recall a lot of the stuff that I axed could be in the "development" or "production" section. The bottomline is this: if it is really essential, don't add it to the trivia. --Steerpike 16:27, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Sonic 3 Trivia

Did you mean to undo the edits made to the trivia section? I only ask, because you tagged it as a minor edit. Also, I'd really like your input on the talk page - I've made a few sugguestions on how the trivia and boxart sections can be sorted out. 81.137.159.61 17:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I've cut out the entire trivia section. I saw little to no value in practically any of them. Either they were too obscure, too speculative, or better placed elsewhere in the article. Information on Wikipedia's Sonic the Hedgehog 3 page should be noteworthy, not trivial. The more curious readers have a wealth of other detailed sites at their disposal in the links section. Agreed? --Steerpike 19:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Rayman_-_Mister_Stone.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Rayman_-_Mister_Stone.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Rayman_Dream_Forest.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Rayman_Dream_Forest.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Rayman screenshots

We need to know who took these screenshots, because they may or may not be free (as in libre, not as in gratis) depending on who took them. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:31, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Alright. See the Rayman talkpage. --Steerpike 11:16, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Rayman_Skops.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Rayman_Skops.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)