User talk:Salvidrim!

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

 2011 - Q3 & Q4  2012 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4   2013 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4   2014 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4   2015 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4 

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2015 February 19[edit]

Hi Salvidrim! Would you be able to take care of the three discussions at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2015 February 19 about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane Diesel, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garnet Patterson, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liisa Ladouceur? SmokeyJoe (talk · contribs) wrote that the discussions "remain open only due to the bureaucratic difficulty of there being so few DRV closers active at DRV who have not already commented". This has also been listed at WP:ANRFC for a few days. Cunard (talk) 00:54, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for closing the DRVs and AfDs! Cunard (talk) 01:13, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) Yes check.svg Done - I don't patrol DRV/ANRFC more than occasionally (even though I should, since I do enjoy it!) but don't hesitate to seek me out personally for such specific requests (as long as you don't make a habit out of it!). :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  01:15, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you Cunard and Salvidrim!. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:35, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the nice closes in that mess. Well done. - Becksguy (talk) 01:44, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Blocking of MaranoFan[edit]

Hello, Salvidrim!. I was wondering why you blocked fellow user MaranoFan from editing Wikipedia. Replacing JPEG files with PNG files is very common, as PNG files are preferred over JPEG files while uploading cover artworks, as the recommended format is 300px PNG for a cover artwork. Thanks! (Please ping if replied), Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook) 09:52, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Nahnah4 - If you look through the deleted talk page discussions on MF's talk page, the reason why becomes more clear. Only and Diannaa sum it up pretty well here, for example. It looks like MaranoFan was warned many times, so he knew about it, and has even agreed to his block, so I don't see any issues here... Sergecross73 msg me 13:39, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Also, note that the blocking admin is Only. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  13:42, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rob Tallas, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages WHL and IHL (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) 09:30, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Help, please[edit]

I know I'm topic-banned from "gender neutrality of pronouns". However, I need assistance. First of all, an RfC that I started just expired, with no one to close it. Meanwhile, a user is attempting to circumvent the clear consensus against his proposal demonstrated in that RfC by canvassing support for another old RfC, directly below. Would you please solicit a closer for the original RfC, or close it yourself? I don't want to see these tactics employed. RGloucester 00:40, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I have placed a request on WP:ANRFC. I also wish to thank you (a lot) for sticking to what was agreed without raising any fuss, it speaks highly of your dedication to remaining an active contributors as well as your ability to moderate yourself. I am impressed (though not surprised!). :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  01:37, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm not one to break conditions that I agreed to, even if they annoy me. Regardless, I have better things to do than mess around with that sort of stuff. RGloucester 05:39, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm really upset now. A user has canvassed to a bunch of pages to gain support for his cause. It is utterly unacceptable. This user openly admits to being an advocate of certain styles on his user page. The RfC had been running for ages (25 days), and now, a new influx of editors caused by his canvassing to selective projects like the "Gender Studies" has skewed the outcome. His RfC, in of itself, was inappropriate, as it overrode the earlier RfC. What is my recourse? This is unacceptable. Absolutely and truly unacceptable. Please, help. The wrong result is going to happen, and only because of a user who uses dirty tactics. RGloucester 21:35, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  • You'd better do something about this, or I'm going to have to make a bit of a mess around here. The closer of the RfC made a total mess of it all, and clearly failed to read consensus. Because a user bypassed the existing RfC with a new RfC, he overwrote consensus. What's more, he canvassed users from selective projects to his RfC, whilst the original RfC was not touched by any canvassing. The original RfC had a clear result against proscribing the gender neutral "he". Most of the users who opposed the addition of the text in the initial RfC opposed proscribing the gender neutral "he". However, their comments were not taken into account, and they were not invited to participate in the second RfC below, which overwrote their comments. The second RfC was mainly participated in by people canvassed by the opener of the RfC from the "Gender Studies" project, and the like. Now, this very selective group of people has changed the MoS completely. This absurd, and if something isn't done about it, I shall raise hell across these pages. RGloucester 20:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
  • You will do no such thing, or you will unfortunately be met with escalating blocks as a way to enforce your unblock conditions, specifically the part about being TBANed from "the gender-neutrality of pronouns". I have been lenient thus far in allowing you to talk about it on my own talk page, but this is not justifiable per WP:BANEX, and I advise you to forget about these RfCs and focus on something else, like Ukraine. Don't poison your own peace of mind over some trivial wikipolitics matter and instead keep doing what you actually enjoy. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  22:15, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
It is not trivial. Block me for eternity. I shan't allow dirty players of games to think they have some kind of power to destroy the English language. I don't enjoy anything. I only do what is necessary. If you shan't submit the closure for review, I shall do. Legitimate action must be taken. RGloucester 02:28, 12 March 2015 (UTC)


As one involved in SPIs, can you answer the following questions please.

1. If a checkuser spontaneously blocks a named account as a sock, with no SPI and no other discussion at all, should the blocked account be tagged as "confirmed" or as "suspected"?

2. Should a normal administrator (non-checkuser) blocking a named account ever tag it as "confirmed" when there has been no SPI and no checkuser involvement? (talk) 22:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

  • 1. If the Checkuser ran a CU check, they can tag as "confirmed". If they did not run a CU check but blocked without needing it, they can tag as "suspected". They can also not tag at all.
2. An administrator could tag a blocked sock as "confirmed" if there has been confirmation by a CU. Such confirmation is not always made public (i.e.: in an SPI).☺ · Salvidrim! ·  22:33, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks Salvidrim!. That makes it a little clearer. It sounds like a normal administrator should NOT tag as "confirmed" with NO cu input, is that the case? And in what circumstances would the fact that there is cu confirmation be withheld and not made public? (talk) 22:44, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Some admin help[edit]

Hi Salvidrim. I recently brought a discussion over to ANI regarding a user and long story short, the discussion (which is here) got archived without an admin weighing in on a resolution. I tried alerting an admin I generally work with, but I believe they may be off Wiki for a bit. Anyways, I believe there was enough consensus in the discussion to enact a topic ban of all Marvel Comics-related articles for that user. I was hoping you could look at the previous discussion, and possibly complete this action (I know this topic area is a little out of your wheel house, but I believe you've helped me out before on some VG related articles). Thank you for any help you can provide with the matter. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:23, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, Favre1fan93. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  13:27, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Much appreciated! Hope things are well. I try to keep tabs as much as I can with the happenings in the VG project, but I've lately been spending most of my time working on Marvel Cinematic Universe pages. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:54, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Hey Salvidrim. Thanks for all the help with this. Is it possible for Tre's IP to be blocked to prevent them from creating any new accounts? I was equally surprised by the SPI that there was another account out there, one we didn't even know about. That was relegated to their music interests, while Zzaxx was working on their film interests. Thanks again. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:45, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) If I'm not mistaken, his IP should have already been autoblocked, and that is usually set up to block account creation (similar to the IP I'm using now). Autoblocks do expire quicker than the main accounts block, but because regular admins can't view user's IP's, this is what we have to use. (I could be wrong here but this is what I remember being told) EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 18:51, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict)TreCoolGuy was already blocked with ACB, at least since April 2014, so the assumption is that the recent IPs are not exactly the same; perhaps Zzaxx1's block will prevent account creation for a while. In any case, a handful of accounts over a few months don't really justify blocking a range from creating accounts. We're better off just responding to abuse when it happens at this point, until he starts being more active. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  18:51, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
Got it. Well thanks again. I'm always on the look out for if they return. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:59, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Evasion of topic ban by Zzaxx1[edit]

It appears that Zzaxx1 has violated his recent topic ban as seen here and here.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:59, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Undelete request - Firewatch[edit]

You deleted Firewatch in December. It has been recreated (and won't be getting deleted again because it's clearly notable), but the sources are mostly 2014, so it looks like it was notable in December too. Can you undelete the revisions so editors can take a look at the older version? - hahnchen 23:55, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

I did think about that today, and put it on my to-do list to review during the weekend. There shoulnd't be any issues. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  00:24, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Wouldn't that fuck up Axem Titanium's DYK nom though? Maybe we can restore the old revisions later. It's not like there's an attribution issue, Axem's content is his own. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  02:27, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
No it wouldn't. You can make that clear in the nomination. - hahnchen 18:47, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


Hello, Salvidrim!. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

Consliens (talk) 01:19, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

I will forward it (minus your private information) to someone who might be able to help you. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  02:22, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


Hi Salvidrim!, let me start by saying that I don't object to any of your proposals but... I can't understand what the problem is (beyond the systematic harassment that I'm suffering from the tandem Kahastok-WCM since I dared to question their politically-motivated removal attempt of a commons file; since then, they have tried to have me blocked, to remove my user page, gone to the Spanish Wikipedia and tried to shake the waters again...). Have I used the accounts for any purpose that could be deemed as an abuse? I have openly reported my accounts in the proper place (meta) and haven't ever used them for voting, claiming any kind of consensus... Having said that, I can't see any problem in such soft block (I don't know what a soft block is) as I won't use any of the accounts any more. The only exception would be Ecemaml. Please, leave it as is now. I will report the relationship in my user page. Maybe in the future I will resume edition with Ecemaml, but I haven't decided yet. Best regards and many thanks for your understanding --Discasto (talk) 09:27, 17 March 2015 (UTC) PS: I've left a explicit mention about Ecemaml in my Discasto's user page. Is that enough? You can softblock the remaining ones. As stated, it won't be used any more.

  • Thank for for agreeing to this outcome, it speaks a lot about you. "Softblock" means they are blocked in a way that will no affect anything beyong the account itself (such as the underlying IP, etc.), to make sure it does not affect your current account. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  16:43, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
OK, as said, I just want to keep Ecemaml unblocked. I assume the message in my user page (Discasto's one) is enough. Anyway, thank you to you for your mellow approach :-) --Discasto (talk) 16:45, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
No problem, and thanks for your cooperation. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  16:47, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of BitGamer for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article BitGamer is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BitGamer (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

UTRS question[edit]

Hey Salvidrim, you reserved UTRS#13343 back on the 6th, but there hasn't been any activity on it since, nor was it moved to "hold" status. Are you still working on it? --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:50, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I must've reserved it accidentally! ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  21:53, 17 March 2015 (UTC)


You closed the deletion discussion with a decision to delete, but the above page is still extant. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 08:27, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It was deleted at the time and was subsequently recreated later that year (2013). Some of the content was the same as the deleted draft, but it has since changed. czar  13:08, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks for notifying me -- I'll look at it later. Note that StevePiercell is th e guy I emailed a copy of the article to. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  13:53, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oh my god, I think it's the guy who died in a car crash days ago :/ Anyways, the current sourcing seems sufficient for me to think it would survive an AfD, and it's vastly different (so no reason to G4 it). BeenAroundAWhile, you're welcome to start a new AfD if you think it is necessary. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  14:25, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


Remember you had forgiven a sock puppeteer who was already blocked a few years ago for evading his block?[1] It was known that he was socking with intention and he was aware of WP:SOCK. You thought that he has now promised not to sock and not to disrupt anymore? Because of that decision of yours, he passed a strong SPI and continues to sock. Today I am suffering from an unwarranted block when I had made only 2 reverts in 5 days. I had no prior blocks.

What should we do now? I have started another SPI. How would you analyze an editor cannot understand WP:COPYVIO, WP:BRD, WP:NOTABILITY, WP:ILLEGIT and tells others to seek for a "higher wikitalk level"[2] for removing any of the violation of these policies? OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 07:52, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

I've always been transparent when I evaded my block in the past due to not fulling understanding the rules back then regarding talk pages (signing off with my own nick is clear indication I had nothing to hide). And this round of SPI is purely frivolous. How frivolous some of the accusations?

72 says "This article is about Rape in India",[3] TCKTKtool says "This article is about Rape in India".[4] Zhanzhao says "it IS about rape in india".[5] OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 07:41, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Yet the edit summary of another editor who also used the exact same words This article is about Rape in India. There aren't that many ways to express a generic statement like this is about XX article. But I guess this escaped the accuser's notice just because that editor didn't happen to get into his bad books. OccultZone is just unhappy that I avoided the last fracas he was involved in on the article and hence managed to avoid the block wave. So now he's throwing anything and everything at me, hoping something sticks. I'm fully certain the result of the CheckUser will vindicate me, so the question now is, what remedy do I have against a vindictive editor.... Zhanzhao (talk) 04:58, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for the troubles and thanks for your support just now. Will be taking a break. If its not too much to ask, could you do me one last favor? Could you help me delete the following edits and comments [6][7][8]? I might have revealed too much about myself in a fit of anger just now. Don't want to blame OccultZone unjustly if someone does manage to dig out my identity. My self-outing is my fault alone so I may retire my account to prevent this from further affecting me in my real life. If its too much, I understand. Thanks again. Zhanzhao (talk) 11:40, 28 March 2015 (UTC)


I recall that you've been involved in the past with dealing with Masu7 and his various sock puppets. Well he is still going this time under User:GOOnussA, recreating an existing article on Panadura Royall College. Is it possible to get this new account blocked and the pages deleted (again). 06:50, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Somebody apparently got to it before I could. Sorry! ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  03:30, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
No need for apologies. It's just hard to understand why they keep trying to recreate a page that already exists. Dan arndt (talk) 09:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

UTRS question for #13276[edit]

Howdy, do you have any additional information on the UTRS request #13276 from User:Munjanes ? If not, I'd like to take over the request. Nakon 23:47, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

  • I keep meaning to come back to it but haven't yet been able to find the time to devote to it. I think a properly researched and presented appeal has a chance of success on AN despite the user's bungled procedure a couple of months ago. You can go ahead and take care of it, with my sincere apologies for not handling things in a timely manner. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  03:32, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! Nakon 04:33, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

DeObia Oparei image[edit]

Hi Salvidrim. I'm actually asking for help. I'm the one who uploaded the images but want to know how I can upload an image that won't violate anything!! Can you help? I'm a friend of the actor and he asked me to help. He emailed the images to me. Now, obviously I could be making this up but I have no reason to. I also don't want to violate any policies so I would appreciate any advice here. I'm also not blatantly trying to flout any copyright laws. I'm just a newbie at this. I have many images which he has sent me. Thanks TrekkieGeek. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrekkieGeek (talkcontribs) 19:48, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

You should get the copyright holder to follow the procedure found at WP:CONSENT. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  19:53, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you very much. I will email him now. I assume he needs to attach a copy of the image? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrekkieGeek (talkcontribs) 19:55, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Ignore last question, I found the answer. TrekkieGeek (talk) 20:17, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

The images you attempted to upload appeared to have been copyrighted by Getty Images, not Deobia Oparei, and Getty only licenses images in exchange for very high fees, which is incompatible with Wikipedia's free-licensing requirements. The best option would be for Deobia to take, himself, a brand new picture that he likes and release it under a free license by following the above-mentioned process. I encourage you to post all of your questions at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Please also note that if you are indeed editing a Wikipedia article on behalf of the subject, you still need to adhere to our policies on conflicts of interest. If you are receiving payment, you must publicly disclose it. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  20:21, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I will pass it on to him. No payment being received so not necessary. Will read the COI policy now. Thanks for all the help Salvidrim! TrekkieGeek (talk) 20:26, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I placed a welcome template on your talk page with some links you might find useful. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  20:41, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks, will leave you in peace now. TrekkieGeek (talk) 20:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Macy's Vandal[edit]

He's back, again. It may be worth adding (indefinite) protection to the Mario franchise template since it seldom changes. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 21:07, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I've left both it and the Pokémon one intentionally unprotected; the vandalism is not incessant (more sporadic), and it gives me an easy way to spot the IPs and then clean up the other problematic contributions we might not notice otherwise (new drafts, etc.) -- it's hardly a good solution, but it the best I could come up with. Thanks for your vigilance on this one, I had already flagged it for myself later. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  21:18, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I am not sure about this...[edit]

... but user Tripple-ddd was switching on my alarm bells. Especially a 145k edit WARNING WARNING make me think of our friend NYCSlover. What do you think? False alarm? The Banner talk 20:48, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't recall a previous sock of his engaging in actual discussion (see WT:VG), so I'm leaning towards the large edits being a coincidence in this case. Time will no doubt tell. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  16:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
True. We have to wait. The Banner talk 21:58, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Did those old socks have a major issue with moving pages? Because Tripple-ddd has a bad habit of moving things to completely inappropriate places (putting that article in user space, for example), and then shunting them to several different places (and across namespaces), making it hard to actually work out what was going on. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:29, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Not that I know. It was the combination of a massive edit and the addition of a huge amount of links to disambiguation pages that set off my alarm bells. The Banner talk 10:32, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

List of burn centers in the Kanto Region listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of burn centers in the Kanto Region. Since you had some involvement with the List of burn centers in the Kanto Region redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 23:39, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2015[edit]


The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 8, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2015
Fairytale left.png Previous issue | Index | Next issue Fairytale right.png

Project At a Glance
As of Q1 2015, the project has:


To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:46, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Scan req[edit]

Hey Sal—any chance I could get a scan of the Yoshi's Island playback in Nintendo Power #273, November 2011? czar  00:23, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Sure, I'll try to get this for ya yesterday! ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  00:58, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
  • LOL! As it happens, my copy of it (and most later NP issues) is still sealed: . Don't worry though, I don't think there is any value to be gained by keeping them sealed. I'll open it tommorow at work and scan it for you. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  05:07, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
I have it with me, I'll get scans in a couple of hours. Czar, do you prefer sending me an e-mail I can reply to, or do you want me to upload the pages on Imgur? ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  16:08, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Whatever works for you (sent an email), but I prefer Dropbox/download links over attachments. Thanks! czar  17:11, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Re: the Mario project, are you into any of those five? How about any of the others? The five I listed at WTVG were the ones I thought would be closest to GA with just a bit of cleanup. I was planning to do SMB2 (since I have the sourcing from The Lost Levels research) and the three Land games next (most in need of a rewrite and I'd be starting from scratch anyway) but I don't know what best suits your style. What would you like? czar  03:03, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I've never been a very good prose composer; even then, I'm better at de-stubifying small articles up to B or C than taking potable articles across the GA treshold. What articles exactly would you defined as part of the proposed GT's topic? ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  03:09, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
The Template:Mario franchise games listed under Super Mario series would be the GT scope, I think. It also will be easier to work on SML1 through 3 at once since the sources are going to overlap, but if you're excited about that one, go for it. Another option if you're into the source stuff would be helping me compile all the print coverage for those three and then I can handle the prose. (Though I think the only way to get better at it is indeed to try) czar  13:29, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Super Mario (series) will be one helluva beast too! I've always been more of a copyeditor/wikifier than a writer, but I guess if I'm gonna pull my weight around here I have to get down and dirty sometimes. :p ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  14:21, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Anything good in this Player One review (p. 15)? Could you perhaps translate a quote or two of anything that might be worth paraphrasing/including? czar  03:34, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Here's the full translation:
The friend of kids is back... on Game boy!

Mario, worlwide star of video gaming, cherished child of Nintendo, discovers with joy a new playground: the Game Boy.
Mario goes to rescue Princess Daisy, held captive by the infamous Tatanga. This adventure of our favorite plumber is specially designed for the Game Boy. As was the case in the first Super Mario game, numerous options are hidden in the background -- gold pieces, invincibility stars, and secret passages or shortcuts. From mushrooms to become Super Mario to flowers to make him ferocious, nothing is forgotten and our hero remains likeable.
On the graphics side, we can't expect miracles on a liquid crystal screen. However, the result is very fine, and the Mario Bros. universe is respected. The musique is sublime, different for each world, it's a blast in stereo. Super Mario Land is a masterpiece, as playable as on a normal console and with a practically unlimited lifetime. It takes its place as the pinnacle of portable video gaming. To be consumed via carry-out or on-the-spot...

The scores in the little red box: Graphics: 85% - Sound: 90% - Lifetime: 95% - Player fun (duh!): 100%.
Hope it helps! :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  03:54, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks! That last part makes for a good quote. Also found a review in Tilt (pp. 87–88). Anything good? czar  14:10, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Somehow I had completely missed this message!! Sorry!
Super Marioland

Game Boy, Nintendo cartridge
Mario's new adventure starts in Egypt, where you explore a pyramid, and continues throughout the world. Every ingredient which made the success of this series is present in this version: bonuses, hidden rooms and secret passages. Nintendo's most famous hero had to be present for the Game Boy's launch. Most of the levels are inspired in great part from Super Mario Bros., but there are also interesting innovations such as shoot-'em-up sequences where Mario pilots an airplane or a submarine. This game draws us in immediately and once again, we are seduced by the flexibility and precision of the controls. Essential.

Author: Alain Huyghues-Lacour
Scores - Interest: 18 | Graphics: 5 stars | Animation: 5 stars | Sound: 4 stars | Price: B
Hope it helps, Czar! :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  19:05, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! Really appreciate it. Would you have any ideas what the ratings are out of? Is there no cumulative assessment? I can't find a key for what interest or price means (I'm guessing it means what it implies directly to the reviewer). There's also a little white star next to the title—not sure if that signifies anything. The following review list had "avis" with quality words like bof/a connaitre/hit, which I translated as whatever/a must/a hit, but I didn't see anything like that in the previous section with actual reviews. czar  20:13, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
There's no explicit explanation.
  • Interest seems to be out of 20
  • Stars seem to go from "-" (equivalent to N/A) to 6 stars but it's not mentioned if it's out of 6 or if it could go higher
  • Price seems to be A-B-C-D-E (assuming A is "better"), but it's not clear if it ranks Price or Price-in-relation-to-quality. Judging from Supertrux's short-form review, it's pretty likely Price by itself that is measured, because it says "it may be cheap, but IT SUCKS ASS", but still got an A for price.
  • The white star in the blue square does have an explanation: "The [star symbol] indicates that another version of this software was tested in a previous issues Hits column." -- I don't think there were any other versions of SML at that point, and in the review they refer to it as "this version", so they're probably referring to SMB as the "other version".
  • "Bof!" = Meh, whatever | "À connaître" = To discover | "HIT" = You take a guess! -- This table is basically a list of shorter reviews, with some comments on the right. Roughly analoguous to modern "drop, rent or buy" tags appended to some game reviews.
Lemme know if there's anything else! :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  23:13, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Forgot to ping you Czar, so dunno if you've seen my reply. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  16:48, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

You ever regret making a certain article?[edit]

'Cause I do, haha! I almost regret being on the opposite end of that debate over Muslim Massacre with MickMacNee, though for different reasons than he has. I regret that I boosted the creator's ego definitely, and propagating offensive stuff. Being an objectivist is an unfortunate thing. :v - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 10:55, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

  • I haven't had the opportunity to regret any article creation (yet!), but I can definitely empathize! For what's it's worth, I think that specific article has enough reason to exist. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  13:17, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I believe my Article was notable enough this time[edit]

Hello. I believe my Article was notable enough this time however it is deleted without giving me any satisfactory explanation. The procedure i have followed: Make draft, join chat and spend 1 whole day to edit and compose excellent article based on suggestion and edits by experts at the chat, submit draft, draft accepted, draft reviewed and edited by WikiProject_Video_games editor and completely published. Then i ask chat again about isn’t this too much edit? then primefac opens speedy delete then it is deleted without giving me any explanation in matter of minutes. If you check the issue i appreciate ty very much : . And there were not any discussion it was deleted immediately. One more notice: I checked same genre games articles and majority of them have way more less authority references and even some have 0 references. Thank you very much for your help. OnlineGamesExpert (talk) 12:38, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

  • You've been blocked for harassing (meaning: mass-posting on various uninvolved admins' talk pages) as well as e-mailing them (you e-mailed me, I can't be the only one), as well as displaying a generally combative attitude towards Bbb23. Nonetheless, I think the article needs to be judged on its own merits (and not on who wrote it), and I find that the latest revision has vastly different sourcing that the version AfD's three years ago, which (IMO) makes it inelegible for G4 deletion "per previous discussion". I have restored it (and it will surely shortly be sent to a new AfD, where it may or may not be deleted again). ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  18:00, 11 April 2015 (UTC)


Musical note nicu bucule 01.svg

Saw your note[edit]

I saw your note on ANI regarding my filing. I did shorten it up, however, that really was a summary , but I understand what you mean. Thank you. KoshVorlon R.I.P Leonard Nimoy "Live Long and Prosper" 18:22, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

  • Np. I know some cases are really hard to fully present without long texts but I'm just trying to provide guidance in how to maximize success at AN. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  18:52, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

In Re[edit]

In re this: I'm no longer active on WP but still read it. I abided by the IBAN and TBAN (in place since Feb 2013) while still editing and, if I return, have zero interest in appealing either. And I have no objections to your proposed re-wording of the entry at WP: EDR. But "fabrication" is offensive and inaccurate, particularly two years on without incident.Tristan noir (talk) 16:42, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Yea, I don't particularly enjoy the implications behind the chosen verb either. I'll look for alternatives. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  16:46, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the prompt reply. Your proposed "initiated" seems fair enough and removes the black brush and tar.Tristan noir (talk) 16:52, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Draft:David D. Demarest concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:David D. Demarest, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Thomas Anderson concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Thomas Anderson, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:37, 18 April 2015 (UTC)


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Issues_at_Rgloucester.27s_talk_page. Thank you. Tutelary (talk) 21:19, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Society of Mechanical Engineers[edit]

Hi! The article Society of Mechanical Engineers was previously created by Vigneshwar29395, and than speedily deleted. It is now recreated by Vicky29395. I would like to ask you to compare the deleted version and the new version, to see if they are too similar. I'm suspecting that those two accounts are the same person. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:03, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

The deleted revisions are actually just an infobox. Comparing the deleted revision to the first recreation revision: both are just infoboxes, but (surprisingly) the recreation has different wordings and different data when compared to the originally deleted revision. However, even that can't balance the username similarities and the fact both recreated the same title -- in my mind, it's clear they are the same person. Neither is blocked and there is no overlap first account stopped in May 2013, then second account used one day in August 2014, then came back to first account in 2015) so I'm not sure if there is any action to take, we might be better off warning about content. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  13:39, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Are you going to warn the user? Vanjagenije (talk) 14:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Ted Yoder[edit]

Hello, Salvidrim!. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Ted Yoder".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:Ted Yoder}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 15:33, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank You!![edit]

I've been having are hard time trying to explain to the i.p that it was stock sound effects. Isaac Marshall was never credited as Bowser, so I gave up after I reverted once in, can you help me explain to the i.p on Bowser's talk page please, I'm getting a little irritated repeating myself to the i.p, help would be appreciated. --Vaati the Wind Demon (talk) 21:41, 29 April 2015 (UTC)