User talk:Lord Opeth/Archive 2

This page 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.

Tien has been AfD'd

Well, it looks like the merges can just be undone whenever according to the closer of the AfD review for Cell, as long as there is consensus on the talk page. Since there is I suppose an unmerge is imminent.JJJ999 (talk) 22:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Minerva McGonagall.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Hi Lord Opeth!
We thank you for uploading Image:Minerva McGonagall.jpg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot.

--John Bot III (talk) 19:59, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Barnstars 'R' U

		The Hidden Page Barnstar
		I award you one for finding Trekphiler's page for people who always think that "new message" bar is real. Aren't you glad you checked your mail? TREKphiler ^{hit me ♠} 03:05, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Your Dragon Ball edits

Please do not randomly remove Category:Dragon Ball superhuman characters or any other useful categories from any more pages. If you don't agree with their existence, take it to WP:CFD but don't do what you just did. I have to ask, why are you targeting the Dragon Ball ones? I don't see the same happening to the Ranma ½ articles (see Category:Ranma ½ superhuman characters). Please reply on your talk page, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:52, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BellatrixLestrange.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:BellatrixLestrange.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) 05:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Magical Objects in Harry Potter

As I've noticed, you are one of the main contributors to most of the Harry Potter related Wikipedia articles. I have recently edited, the section Magical Objects in Harry Potter to include the Diadem of Ravenclaw, under Legendary objects. I noticed that you deleted the section. Though I do admit, that the section was poorly written, I must insist that the Diadem be placed in the section in question, as it is definitely regarded with the same legendary status as the sword of Godric Gryffindor. I do hope that you will consider this request, and think about possibly writing a section about it. Garet Jax 09:34, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

I am really sorry I did not explain the changes in the summary! I was removing the note about the sellotape which has caused some little controversy (no one is completely sure if it appears in all books and are adding and removing book 7) and I was to look what happened to the Diadem's section until I realized I was not editing the Horcrux article. The Diadem, along with the locket, the cup, etc. are all in the Horcrux article. The Magical Objects article is already long to add all information about Horcruxes as objects (creation, destruction, etc.), and also all of Voldemort's particular Horcruxes (and none of them are even objects, such as Nagini). Greetings! --LoЯd ۞pεth 16:59, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Mergers

Those can happen any time now. I was personally not very active on Wikipedia last month because of NaNoWriMo, and I guess since I started those discussions people are waiting for me to complete the mergers. I have the time now, though, so I can probably work through 'em in this next week or so--though if you want to take on any of them you're more than welcome. :) --Masamage ♫ 04:25, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:FleurGabrielle.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:FleurGabrielle.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) 05:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Orderadvanceguard.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Orderadvanceguard.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) 05:42, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:TheBurrow.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:TheBurrow.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) 05:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Ron Weaseley image

You removed the image of RW, and didn;t really discuss it. As the uploader, it would have been nice of you to let me know your overriding displeasure with the image before orphaning it. Perhaps we should discuss the removal? I've since reinstated the image, and would like it to remain, as it demonstrates RW's characteristic temper. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 05:52, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I just thought that there would be excessive non-free content and since that image does not explain its use (as the Ron and the wand or the Family photo do), it would be ok to remove the image. You know, Faithlessthewonderboy and I have had problems with some people regarding this in the past, that's why we decided to cut as many images as possible, and get group pics in characters lists. But I've seen that Voldemort has more images and Snape has also 4, so I think that Ron's bad temper image is ok. Sorry for not explaining. --LoЯd ۞pεth 17:43, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the talkback notice; I don't watch your page (as you pretty much have your shoes tied well). Thanks for letting me know the reasoning behind RW's image removal. I guess I could expand upon the personality trait being illustrated. I'll try to address it this weekend. Again, thanks for letting me know what was going on. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 17:55, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:JamesLilyPotter.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:JamesLilyPotter.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) 05:34, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Merge proposal

Thanks for the heads-up. I've just spoken my piece over there now. sixtynine ^{• spill it •} 07:00, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Harry Potter articles

I think that with our dialogue at Talk:Dumbledore's Army we are getting out of the point of the discussion. You have provided your opinion regarding Luna's particular merge proposal. The topic you last addressed I think that better fits in the WP HP. I must confess I am a bit confused with what you said about the "pain and anguish" that can last for "weeks or months", as the last mergers and discussions have occured without any problem at all. But I think you would like to make your point in the WikiProject HP. --LoЯd ۞pεth 04:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I have provided no "opinions" on Luna's article specifically; only that I am rather alarmed that there still seems to be this ongoing and repeating deletion and merging "debate" after all these years. And yes - this has been going on for years - you are not the first to propose merging and deleting HP articles. And believe it or not it is "painful" for those editors who meticulously created (for better or worse) the articles, to have them blown away (arbitrarily in their minds) after months or years of relatively stable presence; and they often leave the Project as a result - that is my core concern. That said, if Luna (and other HP articles) do not meet Wikipedia policies, then it must go - there should be no debate. The problem (it seems to me) is that we seem to have adopted a "wear them down and run them off" approach to the deletion and merging process: if consensus says "keep" this time, then just come back in a few months and see if they are still around. It just seems to me there is something fishy about that process. The folks at the HP Project should certainly be involved in deciding which articles stay (or can be fixed) and which cannot; and it should be done more or less "once and for all" in one fell-swoop action, rather than continuing to drag it out over months and years until certain disagreeable folks go away or lose heart. In general, I am trying to understand why we are still deleting and merging articles in the HP series - there should be much stability now that we are a year and a half from the final book. Another user pointed out that this article has previously been up for merging and/or deletion last June or July - a year after Deathly Hallows. If it was selected for keeping before, then why is back on the chopping block six months later, unless there is an ongoing slow-deletion process that is guaranteed to dismay other users? Anyway, again, if Luna's article does not meet Wikipedia policies or is intractably outside of Wiki-guidelines, then by all means it should go. But I would like to see a discussion of all the other candidate HP articles you intend to "prosecute". You are right, this discussion does belong at the HP project page. I was hoping to encourage you to gain consensus there on ALL the articles you intend to delete/merge in the foreseeable future, rather than doing "one-offs" individually at each disfavored article, systematically over months and months, and repeating again as needed. I remain neutral on the issue of Luna; only that I would like to see a better cleanup process in general. Or is Luna the last article you intend to merge/redirect away and essentially delete? Thanks, and hope this clarifies... --T-dot ( ^Talk/contribs ) 14:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

First of all, and this is very important, I really appreaciate the work of those who created the HP articles, without their work we would have no content at all. With the merge proposals, the least I expect is to offend any of them. Also, I fully know that I am not the first one to propose mergers. Regarding Luna, the result of the merge discussion from June was not "Keep", there was no consensus because of some edit warring. Anyway, a user in the current discussion has noted the changes since that proposal until this point, and there have been barely any significant addition or improvement at all. As for the general clean-up, I again suggest you to make the proposal in the WikiProject. --LoЯd ۞pεth 17:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:WKAD.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:WKAD.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 08:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Ginnyharrychamber.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Ginnyharrychamber.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) 05:21, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Death Busters image

Hi! Sorry for the delayed reply; I seem to have fallen off the world for a while. Anyway, yes, that image is great! I've been despairing over the state of the original for ages, but this edit looks very clean, and includes everyone important. Did you make it?

I say, sure, let's pop it up on the talk page as usual, and switch it into the article in a few days if no one objects (which, if it happened, would surprise me a lot). --Masamage ♫ 02:58, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

meaning of "voldemort"

I see that you removed the name section from Voldemort. I think that the article needs to make mention of how "mort" makes readers associate him to "death". I suppose that you won't object if I re-add it using the stuff on this source? Lessons in the teaching of vocabulary from September 11 and Harry Potter (page 6, section "Explore especially rich morphemes")

Thank you for taking it maturely. The best is that you actually looked for a source for your edits. The name section has been a problem in the past because people have made lots of Original Research, for example translating the name into French or German, or even adding a whole table with translations in each language. However, the source you provide seems quite good. It is what a good article like Voldemort's needs if more sections are to be added. Go ahead, no objections from me if there are reliable sources. --LoЯd ۞pεth 05:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the explanations :) I'll see if I can do it tomorrow. --Enric Naval (talk) 05:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I added it again, please check it out. --Enric Naval (talk) 23:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

It seems that other user reverted your changes. I suggest you to take the matter to Talk:Lord Voldemort and we can all discuss this. --LoЯd ۞pεth 00:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Hum, I think I'll try first to write a better text. I'll also see if I can find some other source. --Enric Naval (talk) 00:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Someone else already re-wrote the text. I added a couple of sources, that should do it. --Enric Naval (talk) 22:20, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Luna Lovegood merge proposal

Just letting you know at this point I won't resist a merge with this article. While I disagree with it and consensus might change in the future, I do respect current consensus. --Oakshade (talk) 00:32, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, I proceed with the merge. Thank you. --LoЯd ۞pεth 19:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Darmylogo.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Darmylogo.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. BJBot (talk) 05:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

So...

...your name is basically "Lord City of the Moon"? --Fusionshrimp (talk) 17:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

LOL, well it actually is. But I chose it after the prog metal band. --LoЯd ۞pεth 19:25, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:ERJerry.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:ERJerry.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) 05:13, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: WP:HP Project announcements

If anything, it is an ideal candidate for its low number of members - exactly the sort of news that would not otherwise get any coverage. Feel free to add it. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 08:56, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Marauders.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Marauders.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) 05:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:JamesPotter.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:JamesPotter.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) 05:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:RJLupin.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:RJLupin.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) 05:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:WormtailPoS.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:WormtailPoS.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) 05:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Skeeter hp.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Skeeter hp.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) 05:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Rubeus Hagrid

Hello, I've seen you merging different Harry Potter topics together. How about merging Hagrid's article with the order of the phoenix too? Its almost consist entirely of in-universe material and I doubt anything much useful could be added to it at this point. I would have probably given this proposal myself but am not quite aware of the procedure to do it so I thought that you might take interest in this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by September88 (talk • contribs) 20:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it is quite a good idea. The OotP article is already large. In any case, Hogwarts staff would be a better option, but still Hagrid's information is already large. I'm quite busy at this moment but I'm working on a draft to add more material on Reception and Popular Culture. There are already some facts about Hagrid's impact in articles like Harry Potter parodies, but I haven't got the time to work on it and add it to Hagrid. Also, we have to consider the sections about Grawp and the pets, which would make the Magical creatures article too big too. I think that Hagrid and all those characters related to him together make a reasonable strong article. --LoЯd ۞pεth 19:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

List of supporting characters in ER

I noticed that you reverted an edit I made to this article with this edit. I think you might have misunderstood my intention (rather than removing content I was participating in a proposed splitting up of the page) and would like to ask you to review the discussion on the articles talk page here.--Opark 77 (talk) 16:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Felicia Tilman

Hi. I think the case of Felicia Tilman has to be reported somewhere. This edit warring has to stop. I informed one of the editors that subpages can be used to created a better article in their userspace but it seemed this didn't make things better. Please the next time the other editors reverts you back, consider reporting it instead of keep reverting. I was planning to do it but I didn't have the time till now. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:09, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you. Where is the appropiated place to take this matter to?? --LoЯd ۞pεth 00:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

File:WKAD.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:WKAD.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 22:48, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Fawkes

Hi, since you reverted my edit, could I ask you to incorporate a bit about Fawkes into the Dumbledore article somewhere else? I wasn't particularly happy myself with the placement I decided on, merely couldn't find a better one. Hope I'm not being a pain... :) 84.130.220.10 (talk) 17:58, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I think that Fawkes doesn't deserve a section of his own in Dumbledore's article since it is already mentioned in Magical Creatures, but I am quite surprised that Fawkes is not mentioned at all in the article. However, it is not the only case: Nagini is not mentioned in Voldemort's article either. If you think that Fawkes is important enough to be mentioned in Dumbledore's article, try to add information about him in both the second and the sixth book sections (i.e. when Fawkes comes to Harry's aid because of his loyalty to Dumbledore, or when Fawkes leaves Hogwarts after Dumbledore's death). --LoЯd ۞pεth 18:29, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I think Fawkes/Nagini are important enough to be mentioned in the Dumbledore/Voldemort articles. Speaking strictly from a user's perspective, if I can't remember the names of their respective pets, as happened yesterday, I want to be able to go to their wikipedia articles and Ctrl+F "pet".

I just looked at the character articles for Voldemort and Harry, for inspiration. Nagini, as you say, isn't mentioned at all currently. Hedwig is mentioned under "Abilities and Interests", which strikes me as less than ideal. But then follows a section "Possessions", which could be easily expanded to include pets - unless that raises the same sort of problem as my expanding Dumbledore's "Family" section did? Broadening the view, Lexicon articles (e.g. Dumbledore) seemingly group pets under family, as well as having a "skills and devices" (bullet list) section.

So, looking for a common denominator, is there any objection to giving the Harry and Dumbledore articles a "Possessions and pets" subsection? If one mentions the Elder Wand and the Pensieve as well as Fawkes, it would reach a worthwhile length. And those items are as important to the character as most of the traits discussed in the "Attributes" section, no?

84.130.220.10 (talk) 19:57, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I think that all pets fit perfectly in a "Possessions" section. Go ahead and create it. Regarding Voldemort, I think that it is a different case, as Nagini is a Horcrux and there is a whole article on Horcruxes. --LoЯd ۞pεth 21:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I had the same thought re Voldemort. His only possessions of note that I can think of are his wand and his Horcruxes - or, to put it the other way around, he turned all of his possessions of note into Horcruxes. So no need for a corresponding section in his article.

84.130.220.10 (talk) 16:34, 12 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.130.228.151 (talk)

ETA: Okay, added section, trying for conciseness and contextual relevance. Also squeezed mention of Nagini into Voldemort article. Thanks for your assistance. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.130.228.151 (talk) 19:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Dumbledore's possessions section looks really good. Can I suggest to add also a bit on the Deluminator?? --LoЯd ۞pεth 15:12, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Dumbledoresnl.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Dumbledoresnl.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) 06:01, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Category:Fictional artifacts

Why the gutting of the category without a CfD? - J Greb (talk) 21:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

New America

When performing a merger, please follow the guidelines in Help:Merging and moving pages. It seems you deleted rather than merged New America. Goustien (talk) 06:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I added all the info from the New America article as a section and redirected there. --LoЯd ۞pεth 21:30, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Goustien (talk) 23:02, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

File:VictorLang.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:VictorLang.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 04:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:ProfessorRatigan.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:ProfessorRatigan.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) 05:52, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Supervillain teams

Hmm~. You removed the "Supervillain teams" category from Dead Moon Circus, saying that such a thing "would include Galaxia, Beryl, Wiseman, Nehellenia, etc." I wonder, though. Why does a supervillain have to be the head honcho villain? Since a superhero is just a hero with super-powers, shouldn't any villain with super-powers be a supervillain? If so, then it seems like all five villain sets would count. What do you think? --Masamage ♫ 02:28, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I've always thought of a supervillain team as a combination of various villains of the same status or category. It doesn't have to be a team of head-villains necessarily. For instance, a superhero team would be the League of Justice, and a supervillain team would be the Dark Avangers, that includes Venom (from Spiderman), Daken (enemy of Wolverine), etc. The Sailor Moon villain sets are more like organizations, with a strong leader and several henchmen dedicated to achieve the leader's will. The Death Eaters from Harry Potter or the Sith from Star Wars are similar cases to the Sailor Moon villains. --LoЯd ۞pεth 18:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Not appreciated

Your attempt to remove all pages from the category of Honorverse organisations, without any prior discussion I am aware of, was not appreciated. Debresser (talk) 01:49, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Merging tip

When you merge, per WP:MERGE, you must link the old article in the edit summary to preserve the attribution clause of the GFDL. --Malkinann (talk) 23:21, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Dark Kingdom

Hello, Lord Opeth. You have new messages at Masamage's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

disney villains, regarding your most recent edit.

Please trim all the additions you made regarding the stage shows down to removed the plotlines for each show. The plots are not necessary on a page about the franchise. I'd do it for you, but wanted to give you the opportunity to correct the focus of what you had written first. SpikeJones (talk) 00:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I removed a couple of lines but not all of them. The plotlines are already short, reduced to basic information of the characters' appearances. It is not a complete re-tell of the whole shows, but it is not a mention-only list either. In other franchises as well as in characters' pages there are references to other media with a small summary of their appearances. --LoЯd ۞pεth 00:22, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Thx. Keep in mind that the article is not about the shows the villains appear in, but how disney is marketing the villains themselves. It's a mindset change for some to think about things in that way. SpikeJones (talk) 02:38, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

South Park/Mergers

Good job lately on setting some much-needed merger proposals in motion. Almost two months ago, I thought it was possible to group all the characters without their own articles into maybe just one or two lists, but soon realized that such a list(s) would be way too long. But, I think a minimum of four (possibly three, possibly) 40-50kb articles should be enough to include all characters. I've posted more detail regarding this in a comment about a discussion you started on a talk page here, and also added a new section to the SP WikiProject's talk page about the merger discussions in the hopes of generating more feedback. - SoSaysChappy (talk) 01:06, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Disney edits

Hey there, just a reminder for you to please add a brief edit summary when editing. I didn't see any in the history of your recent Maleficent edits and it makes it difficult to track the changes. Thanks! Cactusjump (talk) 20:12, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

File:DisneyCheshireCat.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:DisneyCheshireCat.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. RadioFan (talk) 04:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

yo Mr. Deletitionist!

The consensus was to merge the information, not to delete it. So go and work on adding the missing templates yourself instead of reasoning their deletion because others don't have them (after the consensous was to NOT delete, but to merge the information). Nergaal (talk) 05:17, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I am not deleting any information besides the templates, whose use is not prefered in character lists such as Characters in Kingdom Hearts or in List of Naruto characters, which are FA status. I will add the information from the templates into the sections (i.e. "Randy first appears in epidose X"), to avoid the deletion of any information, and then remove the templates. I also removed individual images per Wikipedia:Non-free content#Non-free image use in list articles, which states that "Images that show multiple elements of the list at the same time, such as a cast shot or montage for a television show, are strongly preferred over individual images." --LoЯd ۞pεth 18:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I've added details about Grimmauld Place and those were taken off. However, these details were entirely true as directly took from J.K. Rowling's books. I thus do not know why they were taken off...? I was looking for this kind of information and did not find it in Wikipedia, this is why I added it. I thought they could be useful to other users.

Thanks for your answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.185.86.5 (talk) 20:24, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Grimmauld Place

Hi, I don't understand why the description of Grimmauld Place in HP I added was suppressed. I myself was looking for this information, and as I didn't found it on Wikipedia, searched it myself in JK Rowling's books and added it. I reckon that it could be useful for other users as I needed it. Thanks for your answer.

Nanie506 (talk) 08:43, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

DBZ character talk page

Hey mate. I'm asking if you'd be interested to check out the section I opened on the DBZ character talk page in regards to merging. It deals with moving many of the characters listed in the secondary section to the other (tertiary) section, as many more influential and important characters have now been merged or deleted. It would only be proper to sustain and maintain the same consensus on the entire page; I haven't made any changes as of yet as it may not be considered constructive to move characters without a proper debate. Those that are debatable, I've listed them in the same format and hope to get your vote for keeps and merges into the other section. I've only listed the ones I've found to be primarily lesser appearing characters and who are limited to one or two sagas at the most in their appearance, or remain background characters for the most part. As many of the characters who are listed in the secondary section are actually much lesser than those in the other, I was hoping to hear from you and get your votes on the matter. - Zarbon (talk) 23:57, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Harry instructing Neville

by deleting it, do you imply Harry didn't talk to Neville before he left for the forest?? Read the book man! How else is Neville to know the snake Nagini has to be killed? Dont remove stuff unnecessarily in the name of "Clean Up"..!! Krishvanth (talk) 05:21, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

lol, mentioning a sword is supposedly a violation?

if mentioning gryffindor's sword was with neville after the battle is a violation, saying harry's wand was repaired, his scar stopped hurting etc. are all violations! :D and for your info, i wasn't over-detailing - merely rewriting something wrong - you ought to have removed the old wrong bit before i corrected it, so don't blame me..!! anyway, free. Krishvanth (talk) 07:29, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Of course, that particular scene (Neville shown with a group of admirers and the sword in the table) doesn't violate any guideline or policy. What violates Writing about fiction and Plot is to practically re-tell any detail of the plot: "Neville did X because he was told to do Y in order to get Z, and then he was seen eating with A, B, and C, dressing in pink robes which he bought in..." The idea of articles on fictional elements is to discuss the relevance of the element in the work he/she/it is featured in, not to mention every single scene or detail. --LoЯd ۞pεth 16:12, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah okay, no probs - haven't added it back if you noticed - dint feel there was much point in puttin tat there anyways... Krishvanth (talk) 17:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Megara

Hello Lord Opeth. I'm not sure that the merge of Megara (Disney character) into Megara (mythology) is such a good idea. I think that having separate articles is the best structure. I've started a discussion on the talk page, Please join in ;-) Regards, Paul August ☎ 16:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey there! I addressed the topic in the talk page. Greetings! --LoЯd ۞pεth 16:44, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

here's something juicy

under section ginny weasley from Dumbledore's Army, before the epilogue paragraph

"there would be time to talk later, hours and days, and maybe years." <- its an actual extract from the book. removed it once but someone's put it back again. Krishvanth (talk) 12:27, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:DeathEaters.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:DeathEaters.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ejfetters (talk) 07:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Ginny Weasley

Since for some inexplicable reason, a character with few lines and scenes throughout the whole series has it's own page back, I saw that the way it was written before was totally unacceptable (in-universe amongst other issues - including having what appeared to be the longest of any HP character page article!). I restored the original version, prior to the merge to Dumbledore's Army. As a more senior editor here, can you have a look at it and throw in your 2 cents (or more)? Thanks Ccrashh (talk) 01:45, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

My friend, what can I say? I think as you do: perhaps Ginny is a relevant character within the series, but the thing is that fictional characters must prove notability by their own to deserve their own article. I think you did well to restore the version prior to the merger into Dumbledore's Army, but it proves that the character lacks notability: no coverage by sources that are not primary nor by the author's site, no impact in popular culture, no individual reception. I'll address the topic in Talk:Ginny Weasley. --LoЯd ۞pεth 19:53, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for weighing in on this. I hope she gets merged back into Dumbledore's Army - I totally agree that she is not notable enough to rate her own article. Ccrashh (talk) 13:51, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Tien and Yamcha, and others

I set up a section in regard to lowering Tien and Yamcha on the dbz character talk page (along with other characters). I await your responses/votes. - Zarbon (talk) 14:26, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip!! =) --LoЯd ۞pεth 01:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd also like to personally thank you for voicing your opinion in regard to Frieza maintaining his article. I can't believe TTN nominated the article for merge even after notability was initially established. I'd understand it in the case of Cell and Buu as they were both non-notable in that spectrum, but to just nominate someone for merge without reason seems blatantly un-called for. In any case, just wanted to thank you in that regard and hope to hear from you more frequently on the dbz character talk page as it seems the format is ever-changing and members are frequently bringing up issues. - Zarbon (talk) 14:22, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Desperate Housewives Images

Hi, several weeks ago you removed some of the pictures of the characters I uploaded to the list of "other characters" of the "Desperate Housewives" section on Wikipedia. The pictures you uploaded in their place, though they provide more info because they include several characters, the pictures themselves aren't of great quality, perhaps because they are screen captures or were edited, so I'll be uplaoding pictures for Dylan, Betty and maybe Paul alone. Not every character needs a picture, so I'll leave people like Zach or Adam out, providing a nice gap between every picture. Hope you don't mind. -- Renaboss (talk) 21:15, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:HarryGinnyDH.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:HarryGinnyDH.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. FileBot (talk) 21:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:KarlMayer.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:KarlMayer.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. FileBot (talk) 23:13, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:PaulZachYoung.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PaulZachYoung.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. FileBot (talk) 10:47, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:BettyMatthewApplewhite.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BettyMatthewApplewhite.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. FileBot (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:HuberYoungs.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:HuberYoungs.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. FileBot (talk) 20:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)