User talk:Wikipedian06

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi Wikipedian06,

I've just noticed you've blanked your talk-page.
As I too was taught this, I thought I might best pass it on, but it's policy never to delete your talkpage information. If you want to clean it up, you can create an archive and move it there, like User talk:Wikipedian06/Archive. Feel free to take a look how I did it for an idea.

Cheers JackSparrow Ninja 04:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to move pages to bad titles or before discussions about the title have ended, as you did to NaN, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 07:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] AfD nomination of Dungeons in The Legend of Zelda series

An editor has nominated Dungeons in The Legend of Zelda series, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dungeons in The Legend of Zelda series and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 18:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of characters in The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess

Leaving a message at the talk page doesn't mean you can just go ahead and add anything you like to the article. No one even responded on the talk page yet, so there's no consensus for your edit. Also, this goth thing you keep adding is just POV nonsense. It's funny how you revert someone else's edit (who called Midna a beautiful, tall woman) for POV, but consider calling her a Goth is NPOV. What's also funny is that I supposedly need a chill pill, while you're the one flying off the handle in a big way. You say I need to learn about Wikipedia etiquette. Is that some kind of joke? I've rarely encountered someone so uncivil in both his edit summaries and his user talk messages. "READ THE FUCKING TALK PAGE KTHNXBAI" doesn't inspire me to go into great detail when reverting your edits. Lastly, I gave you a vandalism warning because you reverted all the way back to your own last edit, thereby disregarding any edits in between. It put back a lot of unsourced stuff in the article.--Atlan (talk) 00:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the vandalism warning, since I guess it was an accident. Please be more careful when you revert to an older edit next time.--Atlan (talk) 00:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image uploading

You need to put in fair-use rationale for your images, as well as upload them in a low resolution. I'm not going to do any more than Image:ZeldaTP.jpg for you, so you have to do them yourself. I'm marking them for deletion, which has a 7 day deadline. Also, you need to properly source them. Be more specific than www.nintendo.com - Zero1328 Talk? 14:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Bongobongo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bongobongo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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. 06:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:TP_cg_Midna03.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TP_cg_Midna03.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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. 07:38, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Bongobongo.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 03:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deathly Hallows

I notice you've removing content from Deathly Hallows today. There's no consensus on your removal, and please see also my comment on this talk page, my apologies for the inconvenience. Should you find yourself disagree with what I said, please reopen the archive 14 debate on the Deathly Hallows talk page so that it can be easier for all parties to get involved in the discussion and avoid reverting one another. Thank you for your understanding. Peacent 16:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] July 2007

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Horcrux, you will be blocked from editing. Gscshoyru 19:37, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Horcrux

I'm not vandalising the page, you stupid moron. I'm adding legitimate, sourced information from my copy of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows from DeepDiscount.com, which shipped the book several days early as a mistake on their part. Because I have a legitimate hard copy of the book and am not relying on the "leak," the info is fully legitimate, and there is no reason for Wikipedia to withhold information in this situation.

Get your facts straight, and quit accusing everyone of "vandalism." Did you even read my edits?

Wikipedian06 19:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Good to know. But seeing as I don't have proof you really have the book, it's still not verifiable, and you still can't post it. And if it is real... can't you wait like 4 days before posting it? Thanks. Gscshoyru 19:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Waiting 4 days

It's not Wikipedia's duty to withhold information as they become available. Read the talk page on HP7.

If the media is reporting all these leaks (and in many cases, actually including plot details within the news articles), why can't Wikipedia have information once it's readily available?

Wikipedian06 19:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Because there is no proof that it's a leak and not a hoax. I suggest you take a look at the talk page, because at the bottom it says stuff about people who post spoilers being banned. Gscshoyru 19:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Xenophilius Lovegood

Deleted, same reasons as above -- and if you insist on continuing to do this, you'll get blocked until 12:01 am on Saturday. NawlinWiki 05:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding edits made during July 20, 2007 (UTC)

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. Chaser - T 22:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Civility!

It is not acceptable to call other users 'idiots' in your edit summaries, or indeed anywhere at all. Please see WP:CIVIL and WP:No personal attacks. Continued behaviour in that manner may lead to blocks. For what it's worth, at the time you submitted that summary, you were technically wrong — the book was yet to be legally released for 6 minutes. I realise it's easy to get riled, but remember not to panic and that, most importantly, there is no deadline. Thanks! Angus Lepper(T, C, D) 23:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Potter

Please don't delete alrge parts of the article to add new info. Add your info in the right section and integrate it into what is already there. Thanks. — Carl (CBM · talk) 23:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Posted Information regarding Deathly Hallows

At 23:10 On July 20, 51 minutes before the book was released you edited the article Severus Snape and disclosed that his Patronus is a Doe, which is a major plot point in Deathly Hallows. Ipodman 10:46, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No Personal Attacks

I was crossing out personal attacks to show people that it was wrong. However, I did not remove them because that would be censorship. — Rickyrab | Talk 17:50, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re: Deathly Hallows

It's WAY too long, and we do NOT need chapter-by-chapter summaries detailing every minor event in the book. Judging from previous books, I'd say 8-10 paragraphs is a good length; any more than that, and it's excessively long & overly detailed. Anyone else agree? Wikipedian06 17:46, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

It's nothing compared to the richness of the prose... Suggest the chapters format for a few months as then can be section edited by the many. //FrankB 17:59, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Harry_Potter_and_the_Deathly_Hallows"

Let me add, this will undoubtably grow to about ten times the current length based on prior articles. Though I tend to agree, ;perfering a 'sense' synopsis, no one will likely agree on what should be included, as all six prior novels lend plot elements to this. It's very rich, indeed. Nothing like this has ever happened in literature before. Even isn't of the same magnitude, and that is 165 years back. Hence, I suggest the chapters for now.

Submit best use of editing time after chapter sections would be to minimize plot revelations for a few months. We've centuries to write an encyclopedaic article, right now, the responsible thing would be to protect the facts as much as possible for the enjoyment of the youngest readers. Best regards. // FrankB 17:59, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

I've undone this edit that you made. Please read WP:SEASON. 17Drew 21:19, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] the deathly hallows

you have not discussed the changes you are making on the talk page. Therefore, your edits are the vandalism, not mine. It is a consensus that the list of killed characters is staying, therefore it is staying. Stop removing it. -007bond aka Matthew G aka codingmasters 03:43, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Ch2kdestroyedqs8.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ch2kdestroyedqs8.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:03, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] August 2007

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to HP7, you will be blocked from editing. HP7 is english, and if you carry on, you will probably be banned from editing Wikipedia. Someone dedicated to making your day a little bit better! 10:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any vandalism in your edit, but you should use more polite edit summaries. Thank you, Kusma (talk) 11:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Beramuu.PNG

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ejfetters 21:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:TP cg Midna03.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:TP cg Midna03.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ejfetters 10:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article Priority

Please leave it to the appropriate Wikiprojects to decide what their priorities are and are not. As of now, Brawl is high priority and Melee is top priority for Wikiproject Nintendo, regardless of your personal vendetta against those games. We would appreciate it if you leave the priority messages be until WP:NIN and WP:VG decide to change them. You Can't Review Me!!! 17:32, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Super Mario Galaxy

Do you have proof that it's really a gameplay video of SMG? Youtube is rarely a reliable source. Mario, the coins, and the manta ray look extremely similar, if not the same as SM64. — Malcolm (talk) 20:50, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Galaxy talk page

That wasn't neccesary. Please be more civil in further comments. DurinsBane87 04:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Please be more civil and watch your language next time. Uchiha23 05:57, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MuggleNet.com's What Will Happen in Harry Potter 7

Thanks for the explanation of why you reverted the MuggleNet article, but your reasons for doing so really don't stand up.

There is no evidence that I got my information from the forums because I didn't do so. Similarity of subject matter and/or conclusions is no such proof. When different people independently analyse the same information they may very well come to the same conclusions, which is the reason for any similarities between MuggleNet's forums and "What Will Happen...". There are also huge differences between the content of the forums and the book, particularly with reference to whether Harry is a Horcrux or not.

I do have an account for the MuggleNet forum, obtained several years ago and not used for a very long time. I'm sure, if necessary, the technical staff from the site can check for the date of my last login, which was well before the development of the book. This is far better proof that I didn't use the forums than any similarities in conclusions, which simply come from the fact that similar evidence was being considered.

I believe that Wikipedia is striving to present information as accurate as possible, and I'm simply aiding this process by using the knowledge that I have - which I have because I know more about the writing of "What Will Happen..." than you do. I replaced an incorrect statement with a correct one, so please don't increase the inaccuracy of the article by keeping on changing it back. Bobby Skank 12:17, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass genre dispute

You stated on the talk page of this article that the game is classified as an action-adventure game on Nintendo's website. Where exactly is this statement? It would be useful to end the dispute over it at the moment. Haipa Doragon (talk) 12:24, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Boo-mario.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Beramuu.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Beramuu.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:51, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Beramuu.PNG)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TP cg Midna03.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TP cg Midna03.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:11, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lead section

You shouldn't remove something from the body of an article simply because it's found in the lead. The lead serves as summary of the article, so this is to be expected. If the lead contained only information not found in the article body, this would be a problem. Pagrashtak 21:06, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk: Super Mario Galaxy archiving

Hi Wikipedian06,

Just a quick note that your archiving of the talk page may have been a bit hasty. The size of the page should not be the deciding factor so much as the age of the threads--as I noted in my post there, you archived one discussion that was still active only a few hours ago, and there are many others which have been posted to in the past couple of days and may very well still be active. Given the relatively low frequency of discussion, I don't believe that people should have to revive threads they are participating in just because they were gone for a day--even ANI uses a 24-hour limit.

I appreciate that you are trying to keep the page accessable through dial-up, but you have to be wary of actions like this one, particularly since you followed up the archive with a large post of your own. I've suggested implementing MiszaBot functionality on the talk page with a 15-day expiry so we don't need to worry about this in the future. --jonny-mt 06:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I've continued the discussion on the new page. Apologies for the inconvenience! Wikipedian06 (talk) 07:06, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Beramuu.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Beramuu.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Relative velocity

An editor has nominated Relative velocity, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Relative velocity and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 13:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Super Mario Galaxy

I was wondering why you removed the regional sale figures from the Super Mario Galaxy article [1]. They seemed to have been sourced and (in my opinion) added to the article in a positive way. Is it because they were out of date or did you just think they were unnecessary? Regards, Guest9999 (talk) 20:46, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

It was unnecessary of you to remove all that information. Please discuss this first. The Prince (talk) 21:58, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Personal attacks

Please don't make personal attacks against other users in edit summaries, like you did in Super Mario Galaxy. It may result in you getting blocked. The Prince (talk) 20:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Famitsu

Hi there! I reverted your edits again, and invite you to discuss the matter at Talk:Famitsu#Original research. The problem is that you are drawing a conclusion based on an opinion that is not referenced, and according to our policy, if A = B and B = C then A = C is original research if we don't find a reference for A = C. Cheers! -- ReyBrujo (talk) 23:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Super Smash Bros. Brawl

Hey, I noticed that you removed a edit [2] hat had already been okayed in the discussion page. You gave information that Ruby and Sapphire and Super Mario exceeded the opening week sales? Would you care to give me a reference? I'll re-add that piece of information tomorrow if you fail to respond immediately on my talk page. Thanks! --24.6.103.162 (talk) 23:40, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

by 24.6.103.162 I meant me. I keep on getting logged out for some reason. So please respond as soon as possible! --haha169 (talk) 23:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for being so nice to me. I had already checked it, thank you very much. Unfortunately, your note makes no difference since there is no reference template at the bottom. So please change it accordingly. Thanks!--haha169 (talk) 23:48, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Famitsureview.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Famitsureview.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 20:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] References

Hi. When you add a reference, please make sure you use the {{cite web}} template and <ref></ref> before and after it. The Prince (talk) 19:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

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

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] March 9 edit summary

Thank you for your help in keeping the WP:DAYS pages free from non-notable events. However I would like to remind you to be civil when you write your edit summaries. Some user do make good faith edits but are unfamiliar with where to properly contribute their entry. Telling them to "crawl back into your holes" is not necessary. Grouf (talk • contribs) 14:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 4chan importance

I notice you recently changed the importance of 4chan, saying in the edit summary the it is not "important", although you haven't explained why you believe this is the case. I'd like to direct you to this discussion about the importance so that you may put forward your views on this matter.--Kip Kip 00:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Bombchu1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Bombchu1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Smashboards Advertisement

While I understand what you did, in the future, kindly contact me privately when you have an issue so that I can edit appropriate comments myself. I was making an important point with the second paragraph of my reply, and your edit pretty much destroyed it. Arrowned (talk) 03:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Facebook

How is the fiscal information related to the founding of Facebook? The first paragraph talks about the founding and its history, and then the last sentence talks about the financials of the company? Gary King (talk) 00:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Use of Serebii.net

Hi Wikipedian06! I'm surprised that you don't want Serebii.net to be used in the Pokémon Platinum article. I see nothing wrong with using it to confirm that nintendo.co.jp announced the game on May 15. It is a fan site yes, but a good one, updated almost daily. No, I'm not in any way connected with that site, in case you think that. I just think that the date on which the game was first officially confirmed is notable enough to be mentioned (and sourced). Cheers, Face 12:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edits of Twilight Princess

Hello,

Just to let you know, the fact that you've never heard of a particular website is a non-argument. Noone could care less wether you heard of them or not. Game Revolution has been around for twelve years and is therefore one of the longer running game websites. Because of your statements on the talk page, I feel you're not adhering to WP:NPOV. In addition to that, you (maybe inadvertently) removed several footnotes from the article backing the statement that major websites called Twilight Princess the greatest Zelda ever. Per the reasons above, I'm giving you this warning:

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Twilight Princess, without explaining the valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you.

Who are you???? Wikipedian06 (talk) 21:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for not signing the post above :) Cocytus Antenora (talk) 11:21, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Gamerankings

You seem to be someone who knows their stuff about this. Can you tell me why gamerankings isn't allowing logins/new reviews to be added? It's so infuriating. Thanks in advance. Autonova (talk) 11:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ocarina of Time

You say peacock terms in the reception section? Would you care to fix it yourself before you add the template? Those templates are used only if the problem is big, and one editor may not fix them all himself. If the reception section passed FA criteria (and recently too), I say that the reception section does not have a major issue at all. Fix it yourself, because you are not telling us what the problem is. --haha169 (talk) 03:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Agree. Please try and be a little more careful when adding these template. In this context, I think a discussion is needed. The Prince (talk) 12:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Might I tell you that I have never played OoT? Don't accuse somebody of fanboyism, simply because I removed your paragraph about criticism. That still belongs in the lead. If you want, you can insert a bit of criticism into the existing reception paragraph in the lead, but criticism does not merit its own paragraph in the lead. Check WP:VG's May Newsletter for a bit more info on VG leads. (And don't give me "that's not a guideline" stuff. Just check it out.) --haha169 (talk) 19:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Don't attack other editors

You should be familiar with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks

Please try not to do so in the future. --HeaveTheClay (talk) 01:19, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your Edit Summaries

Please do not accuse people of being a fanboy, no matter how that may seem. You recently accused one editor of being a fanboy because he/she removed a passage from the reception section concerning some criticism to OoT. Just revert the edit, it is not necessary to call someone a "fanboy", unless they did something extremely stupid. --haha169 (talk) 03:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)