User talk:Luminum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! JuJube (talk) 10:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Contents

Dust[edit]

Oh, my bad. Could you dig up some Reliable Sources on her so the article won't be a target for deletion? Aipzith (talk) 04:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, can you explain what would be considered a reliable source for fiction (re: Dust)? There's about as much as a blurb about reliable sources for fiction, and since primary sources aren't enough to validate the information about a fictional character, I have no idea what to utilize. Would links to issue summaries be sufficient if they come from a site like "Uncannyxmen.net"?Luminum (talk) 20:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, let me see if I can find one for her first. Aipzith (talk) 20:19, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Okay, here's one: [1] which talks about how unusual it is to have a positive female muslim comic book character. The idea behind getting secondary sources is to show that a topic has an influence in the real world. I'll put it into her article, and you see if you can find any more. Aipzith (talk) 20:32, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you so much. I get it now. Thanks!Luminum (talk) 01:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

March 2008[edit]

  • Sorry about the warning, it was my mistake. Apologies. Steve Crossin (talk) 07:46, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

RE:Kitty Pride[edit]

  • Okay, well, I've added the page to my watchlist, per your request. Me? An admin of some sort? Pfft. No, I'm not an admin as of yet (however I hope to be in the future) Anyway, I also reviewed the history of the article, you commented that "you have tried posting to the user why the content is not applicable, but they would not stop". Could you provide me a diff of where you told them this? I checked the talk pages of all the anonomous users, and I cannot see any notification issued to them regarding our original research policy, nor could I find this on the article's talk page. I would suggest you leave a comment on their talk pages, pointing out our policy on original research. Also, you should try to provide more concise edit summaries, such as "removed original research". This also helps people reverting vandalism in a hurry, as a large removal of content, wiithout an explanation, could be seen as vandalism, as when I placed a warning on your page in error. If the activity on the article persists, contact me, and I can file a request for page protection, or, you can file one yourself. Please note, I cannot intervene, as in, stop their actions. Only an administrator can do this, however, I will help anyone that asks for it. And, my apologies for my delay in a response, at the time of writing this, it is just after 7am. I'll hear from you soon. Regards, Steve Crossin (talk) 20:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:163377-wiccan 400.jpg)[edit]

Nuvola apps important blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:163377-wiccan 400.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) 00:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ozone House logo.PNG)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:Ozone House logo.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) 19:50, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for your recent edits on Nico Minoru. It helped the page a lot. :) Sυρєrıor (Reply!,Contribs) 13:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Luminum, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU for all the help that you gave me by cleaning up the references and other mistakes that I didn't know how to correct. I am sort of getting the hang of SOME of the editing process, but I realize that I know LESS about formatting for the computer than I have yet learned. My last comment was meant to be a thank you as well, but I think I was unclear there. Anyway, I like what you have written (you are articulate, concise, and most importantly skilled). Thank you again for all the help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou2u (talkcontribs) 07:52, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Emma Frost in current costume.jpg)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:Emma Frost in current costume.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) 06:47, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Anole[edit]

Hello,

I saw you reverted my edits to the Anole (comics) page. A user had requested additional information on the baby, which I attempted to provide. I will agree certainly that my explanation was a bit much, but it is still vague for someone with little to no knowledge of the storyline. Perhaps we can discuss the issue and reach a concensus on how to expand the information without becoming too verbrose? AUburnTiger (talk) 18:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

non barnstar barnstar[edit]

I see you are busy trying to clean up the Anole article - good stuff, some character articles don't get much attention. I'd give you a barnstar but I can't design them - so have a non-barnstar barnstar. --Cameron Scott (talk) 20:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

talk page info[edit]

Hi. I moved your messages for Plot hole from User:Plot hole to User_talk:Plot hole which is where I'm sure you intended to post them. Cheers! Taroaldo (talk) 04:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Out of curiousity,[edit]

Is that you on ComicVine? There is a user named "Luminum" on ComicVine who (sometimes) edits Runaways-related issues. -- A talk/contribs 23:12, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Scott Pilgrim edits[edit]

Anole peer review[edit]

Hey, Luminum. I've noticed your trying to push Anole (comics) to FA (but GA first). I'm not sure if you know, but the WikiProject Comics is going through a hefty good article drive (several passes in the past few days; just today, Pride & Joy (comics) was passed). I've posted your peer review request at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics, with the hopes that it will eventually become a GA and (potentially) an FA. -- A talk/contribs 01:32, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! And don't even think about it - I'd like to see one of these 'New' X-Men students as a good article, and Victor's a really interesting character. I loved that one scene where Santo (trying to be .. kind, I guess) tried to make them bond and exposed Victor. The best was when Loa (awkwardly) came right after saying "they already knew". Classic. I'm glad to see you've had several replies. -- A talk/contribs 13:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey, Luminum. For the article, have you considered a second image? One I had in mind was (for the 'sexuality' section) that one scene was when Santo actually exposed Victor in front of everyone - just an idea, but I'd be willing to get the actual image. There's another thing I'd like to point out - the 'other versions' section. I know what it means, being a comic reader - other random passers by, however, might get slightly confused. Do you think you'd like to put in a note like "Although Anole is in the main Marvel Universe, he has been depicted in alternate futures or different versions". Something like that, so people who don't read comics would know what the 'other versions' section is for. -- A talk/contribs 21:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, I've already created the image and just uploaded it to RapidShare. Check it out and see if it works with you. -- A talk/contribs 22:54, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Awesome ;) We can crop it two show the top of the first panel (which is evidently the most crucial bit) and all of the second panel - I'm not entirely sure, however, to include the dialogue of the third panel - are you going to do it? I've updated the image so it's .jpg format and it's smaller than the original. -- A talk/contribs 02:52, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
The image should be of decent size if Indra's cut out, though I'm not entirely sure - what do you think? -- A talk/contribs 22:07, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Go ahead - I'm not sure how much to crop it anyways. -- A talk/contribs 00:19, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Aidoflight[edit]

Hi there. Please see the ongoing discussions regarding this user on the WP Comics talk page (under the "Doctor Strange" heading). Hopefully there is a way we can work with this user better, so that they understand our content policies. 204.153.84.10 (talk) 15:20, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I thank you for your concern, but please understand I really would not take years on Wikipedia just to ruin it; I am trying to make good edits. At least some of my edits have been retained; just a note: you really should mind your own problems, you were banned before... Aidoflight (talk) 03:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Forgive me for my discourtesy, yet I personally find my own replies on the Strange talk page and the comic ones were really as civil as I could make them, at least no less so than you and the other users'. I'm barely touching the Strange article now, just voicing thought on its talk page, so I hope the necissity for complaint and debate shall be mitigated; I didn't think that this debate would still be raging on over one article. I mean, I was the one making major edits for months over it; no one else, not even Cameron Scott, despite his clear concern for Doctor Strange, did so. Seeing all that wiped away with minimal discussion kinda pisses me, just to let you know. The first time Cameron major-revamped the Strange article, at least a third of my previous edits vanished. I tried to talk about it, but now, after I did so, even more sections are gone. I hope you and others can work out something soon. Also, I must ask this last question: is undoing everything a legitimate user edits based on identity alone within the bounds of Wikipedia rules? Please respond and enlighten me, my friend. Aidoflight (talk) 23:11, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

As I have stated, I have not touched Doctor Strange. However, with all my years at Wikipedia, I had not until now realized that offering one's aid for article improvement was to be of such controversy as well. I'm sorry, but even if his work is to be praised, the new revision is still quite flawed, to me, at least. Please resolve this issue as soon as possible and make me understand how exactly I could be a better part of the Wikipedia community. Again, I just want to offer my own time and services, nothing more or less. Aidoflight (talk) 23:33, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

New X-Men on Runaways[edit]

Well, Christina Strain's revealed the New X-Men are appearing in Runaways #10 (which is a special one-shot issue in prepration for the new creative team following the next month). Totally looking forward to Anole making an appearance. (: New X-Men meet Runaways. -- A talk/contribs 00:39, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Ahah, I know! No problem. (: But I've only just noticed that Strain's just confirmed it - Yost hinted it several months earlier himself. I know Wolverine, Beast and Colossus make appearances - but I'm glad the former New X-Men make cameos. Hopefully it's great - Strain says it's "the funniest issue of Runaways ever written", so I'm looking forward to it, even though it's just a one-shot. Are you planning on reading the upcoming New Mutants series? The preview depicts several of the New X-Men (Anole, Rockslide and Mercury) arguging with Cannonball. -- A talk/contribs 14:09, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
He's very frustrating. The issue comes out this upcoming Wednesday! I'm excited. CBR's preview. From what I can tell, it's a preview of both stories in the issue. -- A talk/contribs 12:44, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
You know, looking at it now - Cyclops' line of "sending a squad" to keep an eye on the Runaways must be the New X-Men. -- A talk/contribs 20:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Loved the throwback (: The only issue I have is the fact Karolina never actually kissed Nico ... but I guess that's a retcon. And Karolina never even met Kitty. Oh, great job protecting several articles from cruft, btw. -- A talk/contribs 17:58, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey, Luminum. Catch the issue? I only just found this out because I wasn't looking carefully - but in that one scene where the Runaways/New X-Men are at a club, notice the two people off to the side who aren't dancing. -- A talk/contribs 20:43, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Thank you trashcan.jpg Thanks
I just wanted to express my gratitude for your "Keep" vote for the Celia Ammerman AFD. The article has not been deleted, which I believe was the right decision, and it's thanks in part to your support. I very much appreciate it! Let me know if I can ever be of any assistance. — Hunter Kahn (contribs) 05:26, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: The Pride[edit]

Hey, Luminum! Yeah, I've noticed how bloated that portion was. Thing is, I've reverted that user so many times I felt that if I reverted him again this time, he'd strike up another tirade with me so I've left it alone for the time being. I'll trim it down quick - might be hard to believe, but that entire chunk was actually only two-three panels, if I remember correctly. Thanks for reminding me. (: Hah, I liked Runaways 10 - I'd always wanted to see my two favourite teams crossover, and now I'm glad to say it finally happened. I sent Yost a congratulatory message through CBR - I'm honoured that he responded! -- A talk/contribs 13:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey, Luminum. Aidoflight has left a message on my talk page, expecting you to respond there, I guess. Not sure really. -- A talk/contribs 22:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure what your message meant, and now, I am sorry, I really cannot care less what it meant. I understand the two of you, from the way you speak with each other, have very close relationships, and are clearly both opposed to me for this. I myself can't believe I spent so much time on Wikipedia when I actually want to have a social life, unlike many of you here. I mean, seriously, all you Wikipedians here do is laugh at others behind their backs; I still don't understand why I wasn't informed the first time you were all upset with me, though certainly the fact the few of you on that talk page knew each other well for at least months had nothing to with it. Honestly, the people I meet here are so messed up, it's like they can't bear having a Wikipedia page a bit different than the way they want it. Like, "he'd strike up another tirade with me"? Really, no offense, but I was kind of laughing my ass off at that one. Really, there's something wrong with you people; I mean, what kind of normal American would spend hours editing at something like Galactus or Runaways; in New York, that is not just too sad to be spoken of, but rather somewhat socially unacceptable, and I think my own social life is rather more important that whether or not the Avengers know the Pride. What was all that freaking shit you left me for? From the 1st day I've been here, nothing I've done's been appreciated, you don't even take me seriously, probably laughing your ass off as hard as I did when you erase my edits. I personally now think it's just a waste of my own time to be here, and please, don't respond again talking about how everything I say here is, like, against Wikipedian rules. Bye, Luminum. Great luck in your future, Aidoflight (talk) 00:51, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, that didn't go too well. Didn't expect him to read ^ and take my sarcasm quite seriously. Thing is though, if you look in one of my archives (April? not sure) he did come to me with a ... high temper, I guess. I'd rather not say tirade again. Misconceptions aside, Luminum, I have to praise your patience. I was surprised at the length of reasoning you had given the user while still remaining positive and entirely neutral. It's amazing, really. -- A talk/contribs 02:52, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, no kidding. Well, you tried your best really. At least cruft is out of the picture. It's so cool how even though you don't read the series, but still know the characters. In response to that quote Marvel's released ... well, the issue's out in two weeks and I'm scared to see one of them die. If any of them were to go, I'd say Klara, because frankly, I'm close to the others. I have a (sad) speculation that it may be Xavin, off in space fighting soldiers. I would (evidently) want Gert back, but the original leader, Alex, would cause more drama with the series. After Vaughan, Whedon was okay, but Moore catapulted the series into rock bottom. Hopefully, this next issue will change things around. I, for one, am liking how Marvel advertises it Found it in New Avengers. -- A talk/contribs 18:08, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

As a last statement to my "tirade," Luminum, A, I would just like to say this: I really am get sick and tired of editing here any more. From what I've read, yes, I think I understand your arguments better, and I am a bit ashamed of my anger, though, like, seriously, you could tell from my first edit on Wikipedia I'm pretty polite most of the time. Trust me, there's been arguments before: like, what about David A and the Balance's feud? Even a Wikipedian can get really, really fucked up in these conditions. Don't take it wrong: I do like editing, and trust me, I do like Wikipedia, but spending the amount of time I formerly did on it...I don't think so. Well, basically, I snapped. I thought at least one tiny edit I made to a page could be kept for a long, long time here, but apparently that will never come to pass. But please, don't think I'm a coward or a weakling or just an over-sentimental fool for saying this: I said I wasn't coming back, and I really doubt I ever will. Maybe you and A are still just laughing out loud at this, or maybe your not. I don't freaking care now. This might be embarassing, or just disgusting to you, but my family...well, I've experienced anger and pain before. You can believe it or not, but my whole bloodline, my own father...they were farmers in another country. My life is way harder than yours, Luminum, trust me. Luminum, I don't know what to say...you might just be repulsed by my more reasonable words here when I cursed you out a few days ago...and I understand. Just remember, I just wanted to fucking help this Wikipedia...and what was the first reaction I got? Like, ten users gathering together and laughing at me, really, behind my back, and I know, it's sad, right, but I didn't even freaking know. And before that, there was this other user who called me something, like, homophobic just because I thought he was a...and just because someone else...Look, please, I know you fucking hate my guts so badly, but, like, no one really supports me online (in the real world, that's another thing), and you could probably get a dozen other users to hate me and ban me because you've been here for so long and have more influence. Just...just, please, don't bother me anymore, and maybe you could forgive my for my temper; maybe when another new user comes along, you and others could help him more, kk? Maybe I'm already a fucking hypocrite for still editing...but, then again, maybe you're not. You could reply to this, but I don't think I'll reply back; I'll be elsewhere. Well, give A my regards, and hopefully my apologies. Good luck on Wikipedia. Bye (don't worry, this time it's for good, that should settle everyone here). Your friend, Aidoflight (talk) 20:43, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

P.S. I don't really know how you and others will react to this, or if you'll care at all, but by my people, I would still be thirteen years of age. Maybe that should excuse some of my immaturity; maybe you'll just kind of look down at me more. Bye.

Re: Nightcrawler pic[edit]

Of course - while the first image did have a blank background and centered the character, it did have a dark tone attached to it. As I had been previously advised not to simply write "fix" into the edit summary, I simply wrote "a recent Nightcrawler". Notice my edit contributions - I simply write "cut", "fix", "add" or "re"; I know I should develop the habit to write a complete edit summary, but (forgive me for saying this) I'm far too hasty. -- A talk/contribs 17:44, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I understand this is completely random, seeing as you don't read Runaways ... but I just noticed the telltale cover to the September issue and I can't sit still ... far too much anticipation. On one hand, I don't want to turn into those mindless fans that believes what solicits and covers lead them to believe, but on the other, I can't really help it. -- A talk/contribs 19:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Don't say that, Luminum! Chase is a brilliant character ... I don't want him to leave. I loved how Gert was completely unique! But your right about two similar roles ... but now I digress. I have a question regarding citing - Christina Strain just revealed who is actually being resurrected in Runaways but she revealed it on a LiveJournal blog post. I'm not sure how to cite that - mind if you could give me a tip? -- A talk/contribs 02:03, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Frankly, I think it was because of the constant speculation. 174 pressing questions can do that to a person. I can see the third citation on the article you've used - thanks. But looking at it now, I figure I probably should wait until the next issue comes out. I've grown weary of listening to writers on forums - Yost/Kyles' most recent comment about 'killing Hellion' just makes me uneasy in general. I think I should wait - although she sounds serious, I can't imagine why she'd want to spoil the story now. Again, thanks! -- A talk/contribs 15:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Improvements notice board[edit]

OK, I finally started an idea I mentioned on the Comics project talk page. :) Feel free to have a go, do whatever you like to make it look better/more functional/whatever, or offer suggestions. BOZ (talk) 14:27, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Anole GA[edit]

psst - I think you missed step #2 under "how to nominate an article"  :) BOZ (talk) 22:31, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

No context to editing[edit]

Hi Luminen: I'm sure that you acted in good faith but I will not make any more contributions to this page (other than the re-edit I am making simultaneously herewith). Your edits totally destroyed the context of my contribution and the material left is pointless and pretentious. Somehow, citing 60 year old Charlie Chan movies is more relevant than new or recent movies starring Asians. My time is too valuable for this. Therefor, if you don't like my re-edit simply remove the entire section. Please rethink your edits. Thanks for your time.(talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC).

Re: Weddings in the United States[edit]

Thanks for voicing your opinion on the GA review of Weddings in the United States, but that wasn't your call to make. I was the first reviewer on the article, and as such, it's my decision whether to fail it or not. The article is part of an educational assignment, and User:Piotrus asked us not to quick-fail any of the articles associated with that project - thus, I gave it a full review and placed it on hold per his request. I don't expect that it will make GA, but their efforts can only improve the article, and if I want to spend time helping them, that's also my choice. Thanks, Nikkimaria (talk) 19:38, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

RE: Just a word[edit]

Thank you for your comments, and thank you sincerely for your encouragement. By means do I wish to challenge anything you wrote to me, although I would ask that you get a broader perspective by reading the entirety of the archives. There is a long history of psychologists (primarily myself, Faustian, and more recently Mirarfra) being told to "go away", if not literally then by the clearest message possible without the literal use of those words. So you found the tip of the iceberg.
I (and the other psychologists) are between the proverbial "rock and hard place". We can't edit for ethical reasons. If we critique the article without naming specific edits (as I initially tried to do), we are criticized for not being specific. The edits I criticized could be narrowed down to about four or five made in a 24 hour period. That's about as narrow as it can get without identifying specific edits. I even named specific sources that should be consulted to fix the problems. My challengers weren't satisfied, however, and kept arguing that I was being "vague" and even threatening to remove my commentary. Then came the flip side of the attacks on me: when I named the specific edit to which I referred, I was accused of "casting dispersions [sic]" and attacking the editor rather than the edit. Thus, the proverbial "rock and hard place".
I truly believe you have the best of intentions, and I am most grateful for that and the fact that you took the time to raise an important issue with me. I think, however, that you got a brief snapshot into a very messy sequence of events: first the psychologists were eliminated as editors of the article (for ethical reasons); then non-psychologists attempted to improve the article without the psychologists, but the subject matter is immensely complex (I didn't feel comfortable editing it until I studied it for 25 years, read every major resource on the topic, and administered and interpreted about 500 Rorschachs), so the product of the non-psychologists efforts, although done with some general intelligence but lack of comprehensive understanding of the Rorschach, was to string together bits and pieces of information that created misleading (not necessarily entirely false) information; then if the psychologists try to comment on the problem, we are told to "go away" or told that we are attacking editors rather than the edit. So now we are not only prevented from editing the article, we are not supposed to criticize the article.
One of the core problems (beyond the image issue that started all of this) is that some (not all) of the nonpsychologists, although likely initially well-intentioned, have taken an "us vs. them" attitude. In some ways I believe the only way they can be satisfied is if "them" (psychologists) don't question what they do. Sadly, that results in an article that can superficially appear to have useful, accurate information, but in the context of the entire field of Rorschach study, poorly reflects the facts.
Thank you again. I hope you understand why I essentially have been placed in an impossible situation. Most psychologists have chosen to stay away from both the article and the talk page. A few of us are hanging on, but I don't know for how long. Ward3001 (talk) 16:07, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again for your additional comments. I think the point where you and I may disagree (maybe) is your statement "Amateur editors are therefore in just as much a rock and a hard place". The quality of the article was made worse when the amateurs attempted to add to the article. That's not a criticism of their efforts on Wikipedia as a whole, only on the Rorschach article. To make it worse, the amateurs do not wish to have the weaknesses of the article pointed out, instead preferring to continue weakening the article while pretending that they are improving it (or possibly they actually believe they are improving it). And you're right; I'm no expert on computer engineering. The difference is, I don't try to be an expert in an article on computer engineering. I don't edit articles that require any degree of technical sophistication outside of my own field. With the Rorschach article, nonexperts have attempted to add to the article and have only made the article worse. To add to these problems, they become very defensive and argumentative if the weaknesses of the article are pointed out. With a few minor exceptions, if no one had edited the article over the past couple of months, the article would be of better quality than it is today. You may disagree, but I consider a stagnant but reasonably accurate article better than one that only gives the appearance of improving. I have no way of proving this, but I suspect part of the motivation behind the recent edits is to show the experts that it can be done without them, which is sad for the article. And the truth is, it possibly could be done without the current experts. But that would require someone else developing more expertise than currently exists among recent editors, and that takes a lot of time and work.
Best wishes. Ward3001 (talk) 21:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I'm fully aware that I can't discern the motives of the amateurs editing the article, and that I was only speculating based on the fact the psychologists (not just me) have generally had almost no influence on the article in the last few months, despite many excellent and scientifically sound points that have been made (and I'll even leave myself out of that view; I'm referring to Faustian and Mirafra). I more firmly believe, regardless of motives, the minority has been given no consideration in the last few months, even though the minority is made up mostly of psychologists. I doubt very seriously that happens much in most articles pertaining to scientific subjects.
You earlier said, "I don't know how this will be resolved (if it ever will)". I don't think it will ever be resolved to the betterment of the article, unless some dedicated amateur decides to devote enormous work into improving the article by actually reading the quality sources. That's unlikely of course. So I think it will probably evolve to the point that no psychologists even try to influence the article. Then the article will become an example of the worst possible outcome of the Wikipedia concept of "anyone can edit". It's a shame it had to happen in a way that can cause so much damage outside of Wikipedia. I've said in the past that Wikipedia is unsurpassed in breadth and (in some cases) depth of coverage, but in some cases such as this article, it is terribly weak in accuracy. That's a problem that neither you nor I can do much about.
Thanks for your patient attempt to communicate. Ward3001 (talk) 21:53, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Cyclops[edit]

I see you are currently rewriting the Cyclops article, which I applaud as the character is my favorite X-Men member. My main piece of advice would be to severaly cut down on the number of references to the comics issues themselves. Notability is based on reliable, third-party sources such as magazine articles and books, and primary sources such as the stories themselves should be avoided as much as possible. If you want to write about something that happened in a story, find a secondary source that describes it. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Even if you aren't comfortable removing all the primary sources, I'd say a good rule of thumb is that 75% of your citations should come from secondary sources. Also, focus on using secondary sources to cite essential things like who created the character (Lee and Kirby, obviously), his first appearance, and changes in costume, because citing a specific issue doesn't necessary verify these items (for example, a character may show up in a comic as if it's his first appearance, when in truth he was previously introduced decades before and what you're currently reading is an in-story flashback). Facts like this are obvious to me and you given we are familiar with X-Men comics, but never neglect the general reader, who may not have knowledge of this things. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:05, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
By secondary sources I don't mean handbooks. The OHOFTMU handbooks are still primary sources, as they are published by Marvel Comics. Anything published by Marvel would be a primary source. A secondary source would be a book about the history of comic books, or an interview with a comics creator. The reason you need to avoid primary sources is because simply appearing in a primary source does not establish the notability of an item, and in fact is open to bias. In the case of comics, they are fiction, and fiction can always be changed (think how DC retcons itself every other week). Citing secondary/third-party sources removes any potential bias, and allows you to craft a fully neutral article, as well as exposes you to actual newsworthy details about the character. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Think of it this way: it's much more informative to cite an interview that explain why Matt Fraction moved the X-Men to San Franciso than citing a comic where the characters moved there. The latter wouldn't tell you anything that you could get from reading the comic itself, while the former has the advantage of providing real-world context from a secondary source. So the X-Men moved to San Francisco in Uncanny #500. Who cares? Simply because it happened in the comic does not make it noteworthy, because primary sources do not dictate notability. However, a comic website article covering the change in the comic does make it noteworthy. There's a reason why all high-quality film articles (generally the best example of fiction-related pages on Wikipedia) rely primarily on secondary sources, and focus on the subjects from a real-world perspective. That means not merely describing what happens in the comics. What matters is why, namely why the creative teams made the choices they did. Even thought I haven't edited it in a bit, I did a massive rewrite of Watchmen for Featured Article Review a few months back; that article will give you an idea of the sort of approach you need to take. Another good example is Jack Sparrow. In contrast, most comic character articles are of subpar quality and are not good examples to follow. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
I agree that secondary sources should be the main part of the references. Rather than removing primary sources, i would suggest putting them in a seperate reference group, like i just did with Northstar. It makes it much easier for reviewers to see what is supported by secondary sources, and also easier for readers to find the issues they are interested in. Best of both worlds!YobMod 12:45, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Anole (comics)/GA1[edit]

I opened up the GA review and the page looks to be in solid shape. I put up some minor things for you to go over. I have not had a chance to check the sourcing, and I will work on that now. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

The review is finished. I wont close it or put it on hold or anything like that, so, take your time and feel free to bring up any questions. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey, good work Luminum! It will be good to see what can really be done with a relatively minor character page. :) BOZ (talk) 05:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
LOL! Hey, I try to be encouraging - I want people who are passionate to be able to feel like they're doing a good job - makes ya feel good don't it? :) BOZ (talk) 06:03, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Passed. It was a good read before I made any notes on the review. I found it rather interesting in more than just a "fictional" manner. Good luck with your writing, and more reviews of GAs is always helpful. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Congrats! BOZ (talk) 16:10, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey, congrats Luminum! Great to see Victor in a GA!-- A talk/contribs 12:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Shatterstarcommon.jpg)[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Shatterstarcommon.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) 21:32, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Main three-in-one.jpg)[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Main three-in-one.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) 08:44, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Northstar / Karma[edit]

Hey, first of all, great work on the Anole (comics) article. I did the LGBT proj assessment back in the day, and i'm just about to scavange sources to bulk up Anole's part in the LGBT themes in comics good article. I see you do lots of X-team character work: Do you have any interest in collaborating on a GA for Northstar or Karma (comics)? They have much longer histories than Anole, but also enough secondary sources to make an interesting read, i think (esp. Northstar of course).

I have every issue of Alpha flight v.1 and New Mutants v.1, and every XM and UXM upto about #450, so i can precis the early plots and first appearances, if you were more a fan of the later stuff? And we can both search for critical secondary sourcing. Let me know what you think (i'll watch this talk page).YobMod 12:01, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:JeanGreyPhoenix.jpg)[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:JeanGreyPhoenix.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. ZooFari 03:37, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MelterII.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MelterII.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. ZooFari 02:54, 14 December 2009 (UTC)


Melter II[edit]

Greetings. I hope my comments weren't too harsh. I always appreciate it when others make positive contributions. Just trying to maintain a little quality control, which is a challenge with some (not so you). If the character does any significant, by all means add it.

Regards

Asgardian (talk) 10:20, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Asgardian RFC/U[edit]

Hi there. I was wondering if you would help me finish up the RFC/U regarding User:Asgardian. I'm going to put the RFC into place before the end of the year, so it would really be great if you could provide any help you are able to give. What I need most are diffs displaying the disputed behavior. I have some already here, but could use some more. I mean just a list of diffs to put in the first five or so categories I listed there, as I already have more than enough illustrative examples. Anything that you think is edit warring (mutiple similar edits to the same article in the span of a few days), incivility, inaccurate edit summaries, or other similar behavioral problems. List them on the RFCU talk page - just the diffs is all I need, because I want people reading the RFC to be able to draw their own conclusions.

Also, I have come up with a desired outcome and a description of the case based on the comments that have been gathered, and I would appreciate any responses to that on the talk page.

Thanks! BOZ (talk) 05:53, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi there,

I'm just letting you know that the Asgardian RFC/U has begun.

If you like, you may post an "Outside view" below Asgardian's response section, detailing their own feelings on the matter. Likewise, you may endorse the main statement, Asgardian's response, or any other view posted on the page.

Thank you for your participation. BOZ (talk) 00:52, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey there, last time I'll bother you. :) Just wanted to remind you that the Asgardian RFC is up and running, and has had a few different viewpoints posted for public consumption. If you wish, you may endorse one or more of these, as well as the main statement or Asgardian's response (not yet posted), and/or you may add your own viewpoint as mentioned above. Thanks, and happy editing. :) BOZ (talk) 13:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Rachel Summers Edit[edit]

Please do not delete talk sections that are relavent to the article. Questions regarding the article are left open to discussion and thus should remain. Thank you. Artemisboy (talk) 17:29, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Rachel exhibited a form of pyrokinesis in the first Excalibur story. Hence the question open to various editors, not just yourself.Artemisboy (talk) 18:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


Brendan Burke[edit]

It is sad that you have chosen to follow the path of hate-mongering McCarthyism set by User:Centpacrr to discredit a perfectly valid WP:AFD. You who pose as a rational liberal-minded individual, jumping on the bandwagon of vandals and voyeurs. You should be condemning the vileness of User:Centpacrr's Machiavellian tactic rather than following suit. I have no intention of being blacklisted or curbing my activities on Wikipedia. You should be ashamed of yourself for judging me for events that happened in 2006, long before you were even an editor here as far as I know, but I don't care enough to even bother to check your logs. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 03:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


First, I do not accept your half-hearted mea culpa. Your "softly, softly" manipulative approach is no better than the blatant viciousness of User:Centpacrr.
Second, I dropped the speedydelete, and had it not been for the suspicious activities of User:JelrGREEN, would probably have left it at that after the article was somewhat expanded.
Finally, if I was so off-base with the Burke case, which you seem to believe is an open and shut case, can you explain the results of the AFD? Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 13:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


I really get sick of all the BS that takes place because of individuals who are "concerned" whether the articles that appear on Wikipedia are of a caliber that would warrant inclusion in an encyclopedia. When Wikipedia was first created, the exciting thing about it was that it could include information about more topics and individuals than ANY PRINT SOURCE ever could. It has since lived down to its reputation as populist schlock that is riddled with factual errors and opinions disguised as face. Further, it's been edited by people with dubious intentions, bigotry, and hatred as their cardinal motivation in making "contributions"! Lou2u (talk) 05:17, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

    • Awkward Prose

That was mostly of my doing. I agree that it was awkward, but I was using it to show that the so-called "peacock terms" were actually taken from direct quotes by known columnists. Also, I figured that it would stop the "un-sourced argument" as well, since it is easy to find a direct quotation. I prefer the changes you made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou2u (talkcontribs) 23:23, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem:-) I didn't take it as a critique. I hated the "quotes" when I left them on the page. I just didn't really know what to do with them since I figured if I left the information there with just a source, I would either be accused of using "peacock terms" again, or I would again be accused of bias. Now that the AfD isn't on the article any longer, I feel like I can exhale. I definitely prefer the way you rewrote it. :-) I am so glad that this article has been spared. :-) !!! Thanks for everything! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou2u (talkcontribs) 23:36, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


I keep forgetting to sign these things. Sorry:-) Lou2u (talk) 23:40, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

The Torontoist[edit]

The article "Brendan Burke Possibly Not Notable Enough for Wikipedia," concludes that "Brendan Burke may only have existed in the public consciousness for a matter of months, but clearly his truncated, but important history deserves its own entry on Wikipedia. That's difficult to argue against as long as Frances Bean Cobain gets one."

LOL. Your argument was used in The Torontoist. Does that mean that YOU'RE notable now too? Fun stuff.


Someone mentioned the "I invite you to apologize for calling me a Nazi" thread too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou2u (talkcontribs) 06:12, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks from me too[edit]

Luminum, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU for all the help that you gave me by cleaning up the references and other mistakes that I didn't know how to correct. I am sort of getting the hang of SOME of the editing process, but I realize that I know LESS about formatting for the computer than I have yet learned. My last comment was meant to be a thank you as well, but I think I was unclear there. Anyway, I like what you have written (you are articulate, concise, and most importantly skilled). Thank you again for all the help. Lou2u (talk) 08:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Jean Grey[edit]

I noticed that you edited the Jean Grey page, reinstating her status as a mass murderer using the explaination that Jean Grey killed an entire solar system and it's inhabitants. The being who actually did that was the Phoenix Force itself. It was revealed in Fantastic Four #286 and X-Factor #1 that the Phoenix Force placed the real Jean Grey in a suspended animation cocoon at the bottom of the Hudson Bay way back in Uncanny X-Men #101 and took her form and place in the X-Men without anyone knowing what really happened. When the real Jean was finally released from the cocoon in Fantastic Four several years after the Phoenix Force doppleganger was "killed" on the moon, Jean absorbed the memories of the solar system's destruction at the hands of the Phoenix but ultimately was not responsible for actually causing the destruction/death. Artemisboy (talk) 20:15, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

References and punctuation[edit]

Wikipedia has traditionally preferred the "references after punctuation" format. I'm not sure if that's specifically stated anywhere, however. Bearcat (talk) 02:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Found it. MOS:PAIC is where the preference is spelled out. Bearcat (talk) 02:30, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Thanks[edit]

No prob L. It's a labor of love. Just glad I have the time to do it. Thanks to you also for the brainstorming on some of the entries. Artemisboy (talk) 16:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Asgardian RFC closed, now at arbitration[edit]

Hello,

I am informing you that the recent RFC/U regarding Asgardian‎ has been closed, and the case is now at arbitration. You are neither required nor requested to participate, but you may view the initial statements for the case (please do not edit that page), and you may view the evidence presented and add more evidence if you wish, or simply follow the case. BOZ (talk) 04:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:UncannyStorm.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:UncannyStorm.png. 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.
  • If you received this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pixiecurrent.JPG[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pixiecurrent.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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 15:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Aurora[edit]

I checked, and that image was used in the first issue of the original OHOTMU series - the credits page lists John Byrne as the artist (obviously), and Rubinstein was the "default" inker if no one else's name was listed. The OHOTMUDE has an entirely different Byrne/Rubinstein image, because by then she had a new costume and her New Wave hairstyle. :) 24.148.0.83 (talk) 11:44, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Superhero infobox images...[edit]

Some things that have cropped up because of File:Aurora Wiki.png...

Based on the Project MoS we shouldn't be using material from The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe or the like.

It is also not a good idea to manipulate the image to create a collage as you did with Aurora Wiki.png.

And what that image has brought in to questions is:

And yes, I understand that the MoS skews to "no background". But the intent there seems to be for an image that in its original state has no background. Unless, as per point 3 there, the subject of the article is "swamped" by the back ground, there should be no reason to remove it. Hence the question regarding Ink Wiki.png, which could also be extended to File:PixieWiki.png, File:X-Men Storm Main.png, File:Jubileewondra.jpg, and File:JeanGreyPhoenix.jpg.

As for the OHOTMU issue... Aurora Wiki.png could be taken to IfD over it and based on content and lack of clarity in the FUR, so could File:QuentinQuire.jpg and EnchantressII.jpg.

- J Greb (talk) 12:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Aurora Wiki.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Aurora Wiki.png. 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 02:53, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

IP removing citation requests[edit]

Thanks for reverting that. This person uses multiple similar IP addresses, per my thread here. 204.153.84.10 (talk) 23:29, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

201 (South Park)[edit]

Nice job with the restructuring in the Reception section. It's much better now. — Hunter Kahn 03:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Since we just so happen to be thanking you, I also wanted to thank you for keeping the Runaways article in check. Hope you're doing well, Luminum. :) -- A talk/contribs 11:40, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Nightcrawler[edit]

That was the picture that was there before the Ramos one was added. [2] --DrBat (talk) 14:34, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Official Handbook to the Marvel Universe A to Z, vol. 13 hardcover[edit]

Per Official Handbook to the Marvel Universe A to Z, vol. 13 hardcover, all of those characters you're reverting ARE official members of the X-Men: The students are official X-Men members in a squad called the "X-Men-in-Training" squad, and if I have to, I'll put that specific squad name on their pages and tag a reference to it each time.

In addition, "Dark X-Men" and "Dark Avengers" have never been and will never be the official names of those teams--they're the names of the comics, but the teams haven't been called that, and in fact, throughout all of Marvel's OFFICIAL handbooks over the last few years, the teams have always been called either "Norman Osborn's X-Men"/"Norman Osborn's Avengers" (see, for example, entries on Namor) or "Avengers (Osborn's Team)"/"X-Men (Osborn's Team)" (see, for example, this week's Avengers Assemble #1 handbook). Please respond if you have any questions about this. DeadpoolRP (talk) 02:34, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I can get what you're saying to some extent, but either way, the teams were STILL never called the Dark X-Men or the Dark Avengers in the comics. Osborn just called them the Avengers and the X-Men . . . DeadpoolRP (talk) 02:52, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
I've gone to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Team listings page you referred me to and discussed things there, so see what you think. Also, in one of your edit summaries, you referred me to the Monet (comics) archives, but I'm not sure what you mean. I know her status as an X-Men member is very much in debate (though Marvel's handbook's have never listed her as one), and there's plenty of discussion about it on the Talk: List of X-Men members page. But the page you linked to (which redirects to M (comics)) includes "X-Men" in her team affiliations list (even though the body text just says she HELPED the X-Men), and I don't see any discussion of the topic on her talk page, unless I'm missing it somehow. Was there another page you were trying to refer me to, or is there some kind of archived page that I'm not seeing? DeadpoolRP (talk) 04:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed addition[edit]

Hi, Luminum. Still interested in getting your feedback on the best way to handle biblio. Looking forward to working with you more on this. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks. Yeah, I know from work -- damn Wikipedia keeps distracting me!   :-)  --Tenebrae (talk) 15:19, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Wow. Dude, that is excellent!! I rewrote the draft with your stuff, and there are one or two questions you could answer, but otherwise ... Dude! (Or did I say that already?) --Tenebrae (talk) 03:14, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, L. You know I like and respect your work. I think the wholesale changes to Wreck-It Ralph may not have been some of your finest. I know from reading it that some of the edits were good and probably necessary. But the overall writing really wasn't there. I'm hoping we and other editors can talk about specific concerns on the talk page. I hope my edit summary wasn't too abrupt — I tried to be diplomatic in the allotted space. Looking forward, as before, to working with you. With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 18:45, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi again, L. As I wrote on the talk page, and as I want to express here, I appreciate your taking my points in the collegial and constructive spirit as they were meant, and I have called on that article's fellow editors to help go through your impressively and articulately detailed notes and to incorporate / adapt your concerns. As I said before, I have nothing but admiration for your skills and for your collaboration. With regards as always, Tenebrae (talk) 19:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Mystique[edit]

Could you take a look at this edit please? 24.148.0.83 (talk) 14:45, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Consensus discussion on source reliability/notability[edit]

Hi. I've started a consensus discussion here. Would you please participate? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:26, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:New mutants magik.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:New mutants magik.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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Bed[edit]

I'm just off to bed, but I'll write you a reply when I get up, just wanted you to know I'd see it. --Cameron Scott (talk) 22:42, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Opps! Sorry, I'll take care of it some time today. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:38, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

My take on it is as follows - you are right there is some confusion in that, in that if you do a detailed and extensive publication history that it seems to make the FCB seem little more than a duplication. I think the stance I take on this is that

a) Like the other sections, the FCB must conform to the MOS in that it should make it clear that a character is the object of a narrative and is not actually real.

b) That the FCB should not confuse the writer by placing in chronological order things that did not happen in chronological order in the real world. For example, If an event is retconned into a character's origin's or background then the FCB should make it clear that this is a revision to the fictional history and not simply treat it as if it has always been there.

3) That the FCB should be there to outline the core aspects and characteristics of a character and their background (hopefully with some quotes or other material outlining creator reasons). So for Jean Grey, that's she's a mutant, that she's an X-men, that she died, that she possessed the phoenix force, that she was married. It's tricky to know where to draw the line but FCB tend to go wrong when they try and recount every adventure and every twist. If someone is notable about a character in a wikipedia sense, then multiple third party sources will have written about it. So all of the things that I have mentioned about JG, you will be able to find sources for. If you are thinking of adding something and it's never been discussed outside of the comic it appeared in, I would consider that trivial and not fit for inclusion. --Cameron Scott (talk) 12:51, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Rogue (comics)[edit]

I was just wondering if you could help out with the article Rogue (comics) which obviously needs help and you are the only one I could have thought of. Jhenderson777 (talk) 18:43, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Proposition Infinity[edit]

Hello Luminum. I saw that you made a Requesting an assessment section on WikiProject Futurama and that you put Proposition Infinity on there. Looking at the article, I think that besides citing the article's first two references and adding a "Production" section, it could be a Good Article. GamerPro64 (talk) 00:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

Futurama-Barnstar1.png The WikiProject Futurama Holophonor Barnstar
But only a few people in the whole universe can play that... And they're not very good at it! -Turanga Leela
I, Stardust8212, award you this WikiProject Futurama Holophonor barnstar for your excellent work in improving the article Proposition Infinity. Keep up the good work!

You may not be aware of this but I've been trying to convince people to work on Futurama episode articles for over two years by bribing them with barnstars, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Futurama#Improve an article, earn a barnstar!, but this is the first time I've actually gotten to give someone the barnstar. Hopefully this will be the first of many. Stardust8212 13:37, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the help (and the sexy barnstar)! Would you mind taking a look at the page again for me before I resubmit?Luminum (talk) 16:08, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Been busy today but had one more look, I think it seems very good. See my notes at the wikiproject about submitting to the good article nomination page, sorry, I should have mentioned it when I reviewed before but to get GA status you must be reviewed at WP:GAN. I think you have a very good chance of passing that review, I know they gave very helpful comments when Space Pilot 3000 and Hell Is Other Robots went through that process. Stardust8212 03:15, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Very nice work on Proposition Infinity! Keep it up. :) Theleftorium (talk) 15:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Inception Plot[edit]

According to the current plot summary of inception Ariadne, the architect, plays no part in the heist. Does not seem correct does it? Valoem talk 19:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Actually the version you posted on the talk page is vastly superior to the correct version imo. I think we should move that over. Valoem talk 20:27, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposition Infinity[edit]

I'm trying to review the episode, but something is missing on the talk page. Did you miss a step in the GAC? Ya, I believe you missed step 3, copy and paste {{subst:GAN|subtopic=Theatre, film, and drama}} to Talk:Proposition Infinity. I'd do it, but then it would show me as the nominator, and then I couldn't review it. Once this is done, I can begin my review. CTJF83 chat 18:22, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Sure, gotta eat some lunch, but then I will start in an hour or so (probably review it while cooking). My brother got me started on watching Futurama, so if you have more GACs, let me know, and I'll be glad to review them. CTJF83 chat 18:33, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Alright, low on before work time, so I prob won't get to it till later tonight. CTJF83 chat 19:38, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
All done, I only have a few concerns CTJF83 chat 02:40, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Ok, a few things still. CTJF83 chat 16:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Luminum![edit]

Just dropping by to thank you for your efforts in the recent Futurama articles, and your attempts at making “Proposition Infinity” a good article. It’s my favourite show, heh. -- A talk/contribs 15:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


AfD nomination of List of fictional magic users[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of fictional magic users, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional magic users (2nd nomination). Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Axem Titanium (talk) 14:47, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

The Prisoner of Benda[edit]

Just wanted to comment on your summary "The limitation is bodies and their immunity to the machine, not minds. If it was minds, then they would never be able to return to their correct bodies." If the restriction was on pairing minds it would in fact be easier. Following a similar solution that was used to the bodies pairing restriction, however if two bodies switched minds and another two bodies switched minds, all four of their minds could be restored without additional bodies that would have been/were required for the body pairing restriction solution. (Hope you followed that) None the less; keep up the good work! Sixequalszero (talk) 12:05, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Rewriting Rictor[edit]

How would you feel about moving the "Powers and abilties" and "Sexual orientation" sections of that article and moving them under a distinct "Characteristics" section. Or the heading "Development". I would like to see this article eventually become an example of what other comic book character articles should aspire to look like. I have started a sandbox here if you want to have a look.~ZytheTalk to me! 18:21, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, yes, that's a given. Hence using a Sandbox to compile quotes from sources and hopefully see if there's enough. The worry to me is that comic book characters for whom there aren't those sources -- do they even deserve to have a dedicated Wikipedia article? Sometimes I think not. ~ZytheTalk to me! 14:16, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
In the days of Marvel Database, DC Database, comicvine and a million comic book fansites, I think there is no harm done in absolutely deleting tumultuous fictional histories (such as Green Goblin's, which is a mess).~ZytheTalk to me! 16:21, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Any restructure involved culling the length though, no? My take is that if a particular scene or arc is pivotal enough, it will demand sourced analysis within a "Development" or "Impact" section. When I was writing Jack Harkness and Ianto Jones and Cordelia Chase, I basically tried to cull the plot dump information down to an out-of-universe prose summary of "Who played who, in what scenes, in what sort of portrayal, and when" to provide a context for the more in-depth discussions in the later sections. So, for Rictor, I would try and boil down the plot summary to a brief overview of the original X-Factor stories, the X-Force stories and the X-Factor v.3 ones with tidy mentions wherever relevant of guest appearances, crossovers and his role in the annual crossover events of the 2000s. The "in-universe" section of the article has to cull information because it doesn't deserve to dominate the whole page the way it does.~ZytheTalk to me! 16:34, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Grandma-Munda-Leela.png[edit]

Copyright-problem.svg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Grandma-Munda-Leela.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file 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 file 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 '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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:30, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Futurama DVDs[edit]

Hey, how many, if any, Futurama DVDs do you have? CTJF83 chat 03:09, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

All of them, why?Luminum (talk) 03:42, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
On my complete episode watch through with Netflix, I just got done with Leela's Homeworld and feel the urge to get it to GA. Its pretty close already, I would just need more commentary, would you like to help? CTJF83 chat 03:47, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Saw 3D plot[edit]

Thanks for your clean up/copyedit of the Saw 3D plot.  :) Mike Allen 08:49, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Characters[edit]

Usually when you start a "characters of" of a series that is originally a graphic novel but also has a film adaptation, both the original GN and the film adaptation versions of the characters are covered in the "characters of" page. It's like List of Death Note characters - that covers the comics and the anime and the films.

In other words "List of characters of Scott Pilgrim" covers both the comic book characters and the film characters.

If you want to put in more info about the characters in the comic book, try to find creation and conception information from O'Malley and/or look for reception from reviews of the comic book.

"I believe in a link you posted on the discussion page, O'Malley also stated that these things weren't canon because they never appeared in the comics," - I think that was only one aspect, where an actor said a trait about one character, but O'Malley said that trait was not true - but that was only concerning one particular trait of Julie Powers.

WhisperToMe (talk) 17:26, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

re:Holic[edit]

Thanks for that. I'll try to check that more often. Do you think that parts from Tsubasa: Reservoir Chronicle may need that change?Tintor2 (talk) 01:16, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Hayley Smith[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Luminum. You have new messages at Talk:List of American Dad! characters#Hayley's last name.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hearfourmewesique (talk) 19:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC)


Need opinions on photos[edit]

Hi. A disagreement has arisen over which of two photos would be better as the main Infobox image for the Ben Templesmith article. Can you participate in this discussion? Thanks, and Happy Holidays. :-) Nightscream (talk)

Orphaned non-free image File:Iron Lad ACC4.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Iron Lad ACC4.png. 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. Courcelles 03:50, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

The Dark Knight Rises[edit]

The article The Dark Knight Rises was created due to a discussion with Erik. But I know due to his discussion that Erik also wanted opinions from the rest of the task force. So I am asking you weigh in on the discussion page of the article about how you feel about it and suggestions how it should be written. Jhenderson 777 21:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Whoops[edit]

Sorry Luminum, here's the new link. And I will give you a new ID. The ID is 5, and the link is here. Yamaha (G88*Test Here.) 00:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Yamaha Contest[edit]

Are you interested in joining the Yamaha Contest? It is a friendly contest sponsered by me to help make Wikipedia a little better. It is not to pit editor to editor, but it is rather a contest to help editors make friends and best of all, make Wikipedia a little better. Click on the link below will take you to the contest page. All you just have to do is to read the rules and sign up in the bottom. I will fix the poster and the partcipation page for your convience. We'll start the contest as soon as 5 people join the contest. Have a great day. Yamaha (G88*Test Here.) 06:35, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Yamaha Contest —Preceding undated comment added 06:36, 26 January 2011 (UTC).

P.S. I left you a treat...

I forgot my password, so I'm typing as IP. Just as you know, I am upset and will retire 2 days. My Userpage and Talk Page has proof. 110.194.120.158 (talk) 08:35, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Kitty Pyrde John Byrne Concept link[edit]

Hi, New to editing Wiki... it appears you removed my recent edit... why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirth181degrees (talkcontribs) 22:44, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Luminum! I appreciate the response and will review the info you provided. Best wishes,Mirth181degrees (talk) 06:17, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Image[edit]

Hello. It's not so much that images need to be user-taken and user-submitted, but rather that images must be either freely-licensed or public domain. The best way to ensure that an image is freely-licensed is for it to be uploaded by the author, but sometimes the creator of an image will email the project with confirmation that (s)he has agreed to freely-license an image in accordance with Wikipedia requirements, or a photographer will upload his/her images to a site like Flickr and tag them with appropriate free licenses.

In this particular case, you will probably want to think about a fair use justification. In other words, copyrighted images can sometimes be uploaded to Wikipedia where there is no free equivalent and the image meets a set of other criteria. In accordance with those criteria, fair use images on Wikipedia are low resolution. Once the image is uploaded, the image description page must contain a fair use rationale (see, for example, this photo). Typically, photos of dead people can be considered for fair use (assuming they meet all the criteria), because there are obviously no opportunities to take a freely-licensed image of the person. I hope that helps. Let me know if you have any other questions, --Skeezix1000 (talk) 17:41, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Article deletion discussion[edit]

Hi. Can you voice your opinion on the Beth Sotelo deletion discussion here? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:05, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Bob's Burgers[edit]

Yes check.svg Done Rusted AutoParts (talk) 19:36 23 March 2011 (UTC)

An/I discussion; Bob's Burgers trivia sock[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. See Wikipedia:ANI#Consensus ban of Sockmaster BlueMondo131 from Bob's Burgers and List of Bob's Burgers episodes. KnownAlias contact 07:01, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Futurama[edit]

Hey, can you help me with commentaries for some episodes, so I/we can try and get it to GA? CTJF83 12:07, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:FuturamaLathalInspection.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FuturamaLathalInspection.png. 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 in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:59, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Anole[edit]

Hi, just wondering, where did you find file:Anoleparents.gif? --DrBat (talk) 07:30, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, do you remember what the other pages showed? :) --DrBat (talk) 07:13, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks again. :) --DrBat (talk) 06:29, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Norman Hetherington assessment[edit]

Hi, I was wondering if you could take care of the assessment for this entry and then mark it completed on the Comics Assessment page?

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In Birth (American Horror Story), you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Stillborn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Ben Templesmith, again[edit]

I apologize for asking, but can you offer your opinion on the latest round of the Ben Templesmith Photo Saga? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 00:33, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 12[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited The Skinny (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page GHB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox Bob's Burgers episode[edit]

Template:Infobox Bob's Burgers episode has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox television episode. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 07:58, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gayby, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Charlie Barnett and Mike Doyle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:58, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:A Clockwork Origin.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:A Clockwork Origin.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:07, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas![edit]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Movie Iceman iceform.jpg)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Movie Iceman iceform.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 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:27, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Great Space Roaster.png listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Great Space Roaster.png, 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. —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:41, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Proposition Infinity.png listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Proposition Infinity.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 19:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

File:That Darn Katz!.png listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:That Darn Katz!.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 00:12, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 18[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sure of You, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Open house (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:JeanGreyPhoenix.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:JeanGreyPhoenix.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — trlkly 06:19, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas![edit]

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Emma Frost, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Byrne (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

I Get Psy-chic Out of You
added a link pointing to Little person
Mazel-Tina
added a link pointing to Bridezilla

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)