User talk:Ryulong

(☞ﾟ∀ﾟ)☞	Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page by using either the "new section" tab or this link.	☜(ﾟ∀ﾟ☜)
	Please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). If you do not sign your comments, I may remove them entirely.
	Please keep your comments short and to the point. I do not want to read essays on this page.
	I will revert and ignore any basic template messages used on my talk page. If you want to talk to me, use your own words.
	I prefer to keep conversations on one page. If I left a message for you on your user talk page, I prefer to respond to you there.

My local time: February 2012 1 Wednesday 11:42 pm EST
Archives
2—6/06 7/06 8/06 9/06 10/06 11/06 12/06 1/07 2/07 3/07 4/07 5/07 6/07 7/07 8/07 9/07 10/07 11/07 12/07 1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08 1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/09 7/09 8/09 9/09 10/09 11/09 12/09 1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10 1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11

---

When I find that the conversations or issues discussed here have either ended or resolved, they will be inserted into my archives at my own discretion.—Ryūlóng

---

Fullstop at end of article name

• See Talk:Evangelion: 1.0 You Are (Not) Alone#Move?. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:50, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Oh goodness. Someone's not assuming good faith.—Ryulong (竜龙) 06:09, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I did not know that the move discussion had closed when I reverted your edit of my talk page. You can revert me and I can discuss what I thought was page move vandalism. – Allen4names 18:36, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Asking to expand this

I'm gonna ask you if you can expand Kyurem vs. the Sacred Swordsmen with more info?--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 14:17, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm not going to do that. But I have removed information that is not relevant.—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:16, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

User_talk:Fastily#User:Ryulong

Thought you might be interested. Regards, FASTILY ^{Happy 2012!!} 20:51, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you.—Ryulong (竜龙) 21:24, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

SHW

This might be a little useful for later on. [1] ~Switch On 2012~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 22:38, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

No it won't. There's nothing there.—Ryulong (竜龙) 23:50, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

It's not the interview but it does state that they have made Kamen Rider Ranger Keys. ~Switch On 2012~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 22:33, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it's particularly relevant, but OK.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Navbox and hlist

Please review MediaWiki talk:Common.css#Flatlist css tweak regarding the migration of navboxes to use hlist. There has indeed been a lot of discussion about this, and hlist is now the new standard for navboxes. It provides ease of editing, greatly reduces template stress and offers improved accessability and semantics. Please undo your reverts. Thank you. — Edokter (talk) — 13:41, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Seconded. See also WP:HLIST. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:06, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Please also be aware that "reverting good-faith actions of other editors (as opposed to vandalism or violations of the BLP policy) is considered disruptive when done to excess" as per Help:Reverting. -- WOSlinker (talk) 14:30, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks you three. Yes Ryu, this is supported by consensus, as established by the addition of css, the addition to WP:Accessibility, and long discussion at Template talk:Navbox. I admit that it may be a good idea to link the new policy, but I didn't expect full reverts... --Izno (talk) 18:37, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Popping in here as well. Ryu, I hope you're aware that the use of WP:Rollback is a privilege, not a right, and your use of it to systematically revert clearly non-vandalistic edits (which are, in fact, supported by consensus through much discussion) completely goes against what the tool is for. I may report you for this, but I'm not sure yet. Jrcla2 (talk) 19:48, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry too much. He said he would revert his edits on my talk page, though he probably should have broached the topic before going through all of the reverts. Where's my good faith? :( --IznoRepeat (talk) 20:09, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

All right. I'll go back and undo everything.—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:38, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I still see a graphical error when dealing with items in parentheses (the second level of indentation). Can that be fixed?—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:48, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately not. It's caused by the line return we add when we use the bullet notation. Were we using pure html to mark these lists up, it wouldn't be there, but that's not the case. :( --IznoRepeat (talk) 20:53, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

So why are we doing it for those instances?—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:53, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Actually, it's the browser adding the space when it encounters an new (nested) <ul>. It's a result of trying to force a block element to behave as if it were an inline element. — Edokter (talk) — 21:11, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Soooooo why are we indenting them on their own line when we can just nest them with the previous entry?—Ryulong (竜龙) 21:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikimarkup still depends on a * to start on a new line; otherwise, it refuses to render as a list item. — Edokter (talk) — 21:14, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

(Reading a bit deeper) Starting a nested list inside a list item would result in an incorrect semantic list structure. — Edokter (talk) — 21:15, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

So instead of using a format that won't result in the unnecessary space (like *[[Foobar]] ([[Foo]]{{·}} [[Bar]]) you're going to stick to the complete hlist format that produces an error?—Ryulong (竜龙) 21:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Depends on what you call an error; I call it a stylized interpunct. One of the reasons to use hlist is to get rid of all those interpunct templates like {{·}}, which take a huge toll on the servers. — Edokter (talk) — 00:10, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

But I'm talking about the fact that you end up with ( Foo · Bar )—Ryulong (竜龙) 00:14, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I know. Spacious parens rule! But seriously, in a horizontal list that actually doesn't look too bad. They are basically interpuncts that look like parens. It also helps identifying it as a list. — Edokter (talk) — 01:38, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Zodiarts looked like aliens

The categories you are talking about is not silly. Zodiarts looked like aliens. NewFranco (talk) 02:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

They are not aliens at all. However, I prefer that the Super Sentai and Kamen Rider pages be absent of all of the crufty "Fictional X" categories.—Ryulong (竜龙) 02:53, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Go-Busters appearance in Gokaiger vs Gavan

The reason someone put RedBuster is bacause he is going to appear in this movie NewFranco (talk) 13:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

But it isn't confirmed who is voicing him and stop using CamelCase for the names. In all the articles we use "Red Buster" not "RedBuster". ~Switch On 2012~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 14:08, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Fractyl confusion

Ryulong, were not Fractyls, don't confuse us NewFranco (talk) 14:11, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Akibaranger

What are we going to do about Hikōnin Sentai Akibaranger? ~Switch On 2012~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 00:07, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

What the heck are you talking about?—Ryulong (竜龙) 00:09, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

This. It seems ridculous but it also seems relevant to Super Sentai even though its not really part of the Super Sentai line up or whatever. ~Switch On 2012~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 00:12, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. It's probably not going to be notable, anyway.—Ryulong (竜龙) 00:14, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Well it is some type of branch of Sentai and will have some sort of timeline. But I don't want to mention it too quickly, maybe when either more info and pics come out or the first episode airs. ~Switch On 2012~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 00:18, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

We will deal with it when reliable sources come out.—Ryulong (竜龙) 00:21, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh and ac tually the series actually is Super Sentai but it isn't part of the line up. That's what got me confused though I'm not sure it matters. ~Switch On 2012~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 01:00, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

It's probably not going to be anything terribly major.—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:02, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Actually since it is part of the actual series and not jsut some parody I think it might be somewhat notable, but it is a spin-off after all so who knows. Atleast we got some of the staff. ~Switch On 2012~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 01:43, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't fucking care, dude. Bug me when something more important happens.—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:47, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

*'s in comments

Thanks! I was wondering why the comments thread didn't look like it usually does. - JRBrown (talk) 20:55, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah. Jinnai has a bad habit of just adding the carriage return between everyone's comments. It doesn't really matter if you use the : to start it off with, but once you use the * it just screws everything up.—Ryulong (竜龙) 21:09, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Another cleanup help

Well this time is the Zoobles page that needs a bit of serious cleanup issue. Will you volunteer to do it, the whole page is a mess.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 15:22, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

I'd rather not.—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:44, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

So you're not used to series/toyline focused for girls? Makes sense.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 05:13, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

No. I just don't give a fuck.—Ryulong (竜龙) 05:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Bihar State Electricity Board

I have removed the A7 speedy deletion tag from Bihar State Electricity Board because I feel that a claim of importance, such as being responsible for the entire electricity supply of an Indian state, is made in the article. However, if you wish to PROD/AfD it, you are free to do so.--Slon02 (talk) 22:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough.—Ryulong (竜龙) 23:48, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Penguin Cabal

Sorry to see this go - would you be willing for me to resurrect it in my user page instead (probably under User:Pek the Penguin)?  An optimist on the run! 10:42, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

No.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:49, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I loved that bloody penguin. You cold blooded murderer. —Dark 10:47, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Just to note that under cc-by-na I could legitimately copy it anyway (even though deleted). However I'll respect your wishes.  An optimist on the run! 10:54, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I'd also be requesting User:Ryulong/CPenguin to be deleted, but I don't want {{db-owner}} plastered across everyone's pages.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:55, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

bleh. —Dark 11:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Now you just need to get rid of all of those transclusions.—Ryulong (竜龙) 11:32, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I do believe that's your job :) —Dark 11:38, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Nope.avi—Ryulong (竜龙) 11:38, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorting Japanese names

It looks like you are the keeper of the Japanese MOS....

I'm trying to update WP:NAMESORT. The updated version is currently at User:Bgwhite/Sandbox. Could you take a look at the Japanese section (it is under the "When" section). My mentor in sorting, JimCubb, used to say sumo wrestlers, kabuki actors others who took on professional names should be sorted different than modern Japanese names. I can't find any documentation for that. Is this true? Bgwhite (talk) 22:05, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Because they're pseudonyms, it is the practice on the English Wikipedia to refer to them in the old form (surname first name). Bandō Mitsugorō VIII is an example.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:32, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Mystery penguin

Hi,
Unfortunately this has expired so it's not possible to identify the penguin. (If I'd know it was temporary I would have saved a copy). Suggestions? bobrayner (talk) 07:46, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

If you get rid of the crap at the end of the filename, you get the image again.—Ryulong (竜龙) 07:53, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Answer from the penguin guru: It's a king penguin. bobrayner (talk) 10:19, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

“

There's quite a bit of yellow on its chest and ear patches (as best you can see) and the beak plates are strongly orange. These areas are generally much more strongly coloured in the kings than the empies. The under-wing colouring is diagnostic for a king - the empies just have a thin dark line along the fore-edge of their flippers. The silvery nape of the neck and the general shape (too slender for an empie) also indicate a king. The location is another major clue: Empies are an ice-obligate species. I can't think of anywhere that you'd commonly see them with green in the background, and that image looks like a subantarctic beach to me. There are a couple of emperor penguin colonies on the Antarctic Peninsula that might be close enough to greenery to provide an occasional visitor, but the crowd of penguins in the background suggests this is very unlikely.

”

Kerria (plant)

Sorry, I reverted your edit to add the names of this plant in Japanese, Korean, and Chinese. This is because we at WP:PLANTS are trying to keep a proliferation of plant names in many languages from developing in the English wikipedia. Instead, there should be interwiki links to the wikipedias in other languages. These are at the bottom of the page, e.g., [[ko:황매화]] [[hsb:Japanska kerija]]. I wonder if you can find equivalent pages in Japanese and Chinese to link this page to? If not, may I suggest putting your information on the talk page, so that it could be used later if such pages are created in those languages. Best wishes, Nadiatalent (talk) 13:50, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

It's a plant native to those nations, so why should we not include the common names from those nations? Particularly because the common name in Japan is also the name of a color.—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:29, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I have moved the text to the talk page, in the hope that someone can use it to make the appropriate links between the English wikipedia and the other-language wikipedias (and wiktionary). Nadiatalent (talk) 13:22, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

We have them. If it's an Asian plant, I don't see why we can't mention the common names in Asia.—Ryulong (竜龙) 01:13, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't see the Japanese one. If the meaning of the name is worth mentioning (for example see Rosa rugosa, which has names that mean different things in different languages, like "bird nose", "stone rose"), etc., then these can be justified. For the colour name, can you give a citation that this is a very common colour name, and not just a name made up for marketing purposes (like "peridot" paint colour)? If names in other languages just get listed, then the list grows rapidly. See discussion of this issue here. Nadiatalent (talk) 13:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

If you consult a Japanese dictionary and look up 山吹 (yamabuki), you will see that that is the name of the yellow Kerria rose. And 山吹色 (yamabuki-iro or yamabuki-colored) is a particular shade of yellow named after the rose.—Ryulong (竜龙) 02:02, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

I need help!

Someone reverted an image edit on the digital television transition and I need any Japanese user's help to provide an authentic analog shutdown caption from any affiliate of one of the four major Japanese commercial television networks (Nippon Network System, Japan Network System, Fuji Network System, or Asahi Network System). J4lambert (talk) 11:09, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm American.—Ryulong (竜龙) 02:03, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Unreliable source?

[2] Pardon me? The magazine, along with Terebi-kun, Gekkan TV Guide and Newtype, has been providing new titles for God knows how long. There is no reason for undoing the edit just because it is not an official source and same for Newtype, which is also not an official source. Recently, the TV guides (including the ones that provide dub titles) have been proved more accurate, even than an official source. Will you please elaborate your revert? Thank you ♫♪AdyNiz♪♫ 05:47, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

It cannot be verified outside of that single image posted some random schlub's Twitter feed. Wait for the Newtype or Best Wishes website to update like we have been doing.—Ryulong (竜龙) 05:57, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Cannot be verified? I am sorry but it is not a valid excuse at all and I fail to see how it is unconfirmed. Also, I am an experienced user and an administrator on a fellow wiki myself, I am well aware of the speculations, have a decent grasp on the policies and respectable sources. It was certainly not a polite way to revert an edit without proper justifications and calling it unverified when there are actually sources to confirm it, is kind of unprofessional. My apologies if you find it offensive but I did not like the way how you acted. ♫♪AdyNiz♪♫ 06:06, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

You do not seem to see the point that whatever other Wiki you do administrative stuff on, none of that matters here. What matters here is WP:RS. I will not approve using some shitty photograph of some Japanese TV guide magazine because you do not know what magazine is the source for any of those images and therefore we cannot use it as a source. You will have to wait for reliable online sources to update like the online Newtype listings. So do not bitch at me for keeping this Wiki clean of fandom nonsense that has absolutely no standards for sourcing.—Ryulong (竜龙) 06:31, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Face Off

About the edits you reverted on the Face Off (season 2) article, what if I edit the season 1 article as well? Because that was my original intention. Thief12 (talk) 03:30, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Your edits just did not look good. They did not match any reality TV show article, either. The status quo is better. This is an article on an individual season, with all of the judge and host information on another page. Contestants in or out of the competition are never listed in a separate list section, and the table provides that information in a much easier to read format. Foundation Challenges never have top looks or bottom looks, just one winner. And finally, using "WINNER" in the prose is unprofessional.—Ryulong (竜龙) 04:31, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I was basing my changes on the Top Chef season articles, but popular reality shows like Next Food Network Star and Project Runway have similar looks, even using the word "WINNER" which you say is "unprofessional". As for the Foundation Challenges, in the first episode, they named two Top looks and two Bottom looks, and then chose Jerry as the winner. The second episode had no Foundation Challenge, but I think they did the same on the third one. But it's okay, anyway. I just thought that the edits would improve the article and make it look better. Thief12 (talk) 15:29, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

So, those other articles are not written in a professional manner. And I do not think your changes are beneficial to the page. The tables are better than lists to show who is and is not in the competition, still.—Ryulong (竜龙) 19:53, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Whether they are professional or not, that's debatable. You think they aren't, I think they are. The fact is that you said there weren't "any reality TV show article" with looks similar to the ones I did, and I just gave you examples of three shows that did. So it's not a matter of "status quo" or consistency with other shows, but a matter of which one you personally like. Which is fine by me, since I don't think the changes I made were that drastic one way or the other. Finally, about the tables vs. lists issue you mentioned, I didn't replace any table with a list. I just separated what is the contestant personal info (name, age, hometown) from the table that shows the contestant progress. The table that showed who's in the competition was left virtually in the same way as it was. The same format of having a list/table with the personal info and the table with the contestant progress can be seen in the season articles for shows like America's Next Top Model, Top Chef, The Next Iron Chef, The Next Food Network Star, and Top Shot, among many others. All of those even use a similar prose using the word "Winner" (a word which even a lot of the reality show hosts and websites use to announce the "winner" of each week, so I don't see how that's unprofessional). But again, it's your call. You've worked on these Face Off pages for more time than I have. I just felt like clarifying a few of the comments in your reply. Thief12 (talk) 22:46, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I was saying that having "WINNER" in all capital letters was unprofessional. Anywa, it is in my opinion that your changes to Face Off (season 2) were unnecessary. There need not be so many different sections describing the outcome of the contest as there are on articles like for the Top Model series. I will concede and re-introduce some of your changes to the article, but I believe that we need not say in two different sections who has been eliminated.—Ryulong (竜龙) 00:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree with ditching the caps, if we are to say "Winner". I also think that indenting some of the outcomes from each episode, like I did with the first episode, makes it more readable and understandable. I don't know if you agree. As for the repetition of information about the contestants, the idea usually is to have a section for the contestant personal info, sometimes with their full names... and a second section just to record the progress where they usually show only the first name or nickname, which is how they are usually identified in the shows. However, while the show is running, some shows like to reflect who's left and who's out in both sections. But that's open to discussion and adjustments. Let me know what you think. Thief12 (talk) 02:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I did a mix in the two formatting styles, keeping what I liked from what you did and incorporating my own new changes.—Ryulong (竜龙) 02:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I like it. Thanks for the compromise. Maybe we can implemnent some of those changes on the season 1 article. Thief12 (talk) 02:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Beat you to the punch there.—Ryulong (竜龙) 02:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)