User talk:Akiyama

Welcome!

Hello, Akiyama, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

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 place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! JackyR 22:58, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Zeitgeist (disambiguation)[edit]

Take a look at Talk:Zeitgeist (disambiguation)/Archive 1 and Talk:Zeitgeist/Archive 1, which should give you some idea of why there is a need to keep that movie out of the talk pages. Basically it was removed because of the Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. The talk pages are supposed to be about improving the article they are attached to. People were using them as a rant for/against the movie. There's a link to an archived version original Wikipedia article in the archives. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 17:04, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gaming worlds[edit]

Hi,

It'd be best if you didn't add worlds to listst that don't have their own wikipages - it is not useful to readers to know only that something supposedly exists, without any further information to be found. Thanks, WLU 15:04, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, note this section of WP:SAL, particularly the statement "Ideally each entry on the list should have a Wikipedia article but this is not required if it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future. The one exception is for list articles that are created explicitly because the listed items do not warrant independent articles" WLU 15:07, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi UTC

I have been using this list since I discovered it, to check out different fantasy worlds from novels and RPGs. It is useful to *me* for the list to be as complete as possible; I assume I am not unique and that there must be at least some other people in the world who would also find it useful! When I come across something without a wiki-page, I can easily discover more about it using a search engine, and other people can do that too. Some fantasy worlds, are, I think, good enough to go on this list (original, detailed, has fans etc.) but not notable enough to have their own Wikipedia page (I guess this comes under the heading of "list articles that are created explicitly because the listed items do not warrent independent articles"). And after all, the page title is "list of fantasy worlds", rather than "list of fantasy worlds with their own pages on Wikipedia"!

The list states at the top that it is a partial list, and if you follow that link, you reach the following text:

It is our hope that other Wikipedians will pick up where we leave off, and add more items to the list, bringing it closer, if not to completion, then at least to a mature state in which only minor updates are required as times change. Of course, it's not clear for all lists what should or shouldn't be on it, and so completion may never be clear for these lists, but there should at least come a point where most representative and widely agreed upon entries are present...

Clearly the idea that lists should be complete conflicts somewhat with the idea that lists should only contain items on which Wikipedia has, or probably will have, an article. I can see that there must be a "notability cut-off line" for list articles, but I don't think the criteria should be as strict as for Wikipedia articles. In the case of the RPG worlds, I have only been adding ones that have been sold by independent online RPG retailers, and have been reviewed by independent major RPG websites. I wouldn't add, for example, a world that only exists on someone's website, or one that didn't make any impact on the RPG market.

BTW, some of unlinked worlds were not added by me, but were originally redlinked, I unlinked them; also, there is information on some of the unlinked worlds on Wikipedia under the name of the author, publisher or game system.

I hope that clears things up. Are you happy for me to continue adding worlds? Akiyama 15:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had a reply but my browser threw up on me and erased it. I hate IE. I see your points, but I still think improvements could be made. What do you think of the following:

Retitle RPG/cards/miniatures as just 'Gaming'
All the d20 Systems (should be d20 Systems by the way, lower-case 's' is a redirect and direct links are preferred) are gathered into a single sub-entry and ideally would have a reference where readers can get more info if they want (really all entries should be linked to some reference, either a wikipage which is itself linked, or an external link). Separately I'd doubt that the minor d20s are sufficiently notable to have their own page, but one heading gathering them together should collectively pass.
Major d20s with their own wikipages stay separate.
'Not quite' section is just integrated into 'Gaming', possibly moving Planes of Existence to the List of fictional universes
You shouldn't 'easter egg' links - specifically, [[The Black Company|World of the Black Company]] strikes me as inappropriate. Readers clicking on the length would expect an article on the World itself. I'd think that 'The world of [[The Black Company]]' is more appropriate.

Thoughts? WLU 16:25, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retitle RPG/cards/miniatures as just 'Gaming'

I like it, but do computer/video gamers think of their hobby as gaming too? Tabletop games?

d20 Systems

Sorry, I thought it was a lower-case 'S'. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "gathering them into a single sub-entry", but putting the minor d20s together and including links sounds like a good idea.

Not quite section

Okay. I had wanted to seperate "partial fantasy worlds" from "complete, named, fantasy worlds", but there must be quite a few debatable cases, and if the minor d20s are being grouped together there's very little need to do this.

Easter egged link

Yes, actually that's what I would have preferred to do myself, but I thought someone would take me to task for it being ugly!

I will probably leave this article be for a while, so if you want to do anything with it, go ahead. I will probably return to it in the future, though, and I will then add links to the minor d20 worlds, if no-one else has done so. I spent a lot of time recently looking up fantasy worlds which should probably have been spent doing something more productive :-) It's just that the idea of a complete list of all fantasy worlds got me excited - yes, I am a bit of a geek!

Again, sorry about the stuff I got wrong. I'm only an occasional, random Wikipedian, so I'm still learning. Thanks for your patience.

BTW, about your browser, my PC uses Opera, which seems to me to be better than IE. Akiyama 17:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a whack at it then, see what you think. I can't switch browsers on my work computer unfortunately, so I have different issues depending on where I'm contributing. WLU 17:23, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done I think. You may be interested in this, which needs to be cleaned up. WLU 17:34, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Cook (playwright)[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Michael Cook (playwright), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Michael Cook. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP AH[edit]

This user wants you to join
WikiProject
Alternate History.

Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 21:20, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]