User talk:Thibbs

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

HELLO - This is the talk page for Thibbs. Please place messages to me at the bottom of my talk page and I will reply as soon as I find the free time. All comments and criticisms are welcome. Normally I will leave my reply here on this page. Thank you.

Read this.[edit]

A few hours ago, I added some stuff to the article about the bootleg videogame "Somari". I changed a word ("spoofs" into "modifications", added a "See also" section linking to that other bootleg game "Kart Fighter" and added a link to the Somari article on the Bootleg Games Wiki. I saved the changes I did but then I discovered a misspelling I did by accident. The 1st time it was reverted, I thought it was because of the typo, so I corrected it and added some more stuff about the variations of the game that I forgot to put down the first time. I also added back in the other stuff not by me that you also deleted because I thought bulked up the article a bit. I honestly taught my edits were constructive and I was only trying to make the page better. I am an expert of videogames and also bootleg videogames and I've played Somari and most of it's variations so I know what I'm doing. I don't want to make this seem like advertising but the Bootleg Games Wiki is genuinely a good wiki if you want to know about bootleg games. I posted that there because I saw wikis being linked to at the bottom of certain pages. For example, at the bottom of the the "Bionicle" page, there is a link to the "BIONICLEsector01" wiki which documents the Lego "Bionicle" series. The page on the superhero "Spider-Man" does something similar. I didn't know that I shouldn't have linked to I thought that if you link to something, it has to related to the page and it has to have a some information on the subject. I would be happy to add sources but those will most likely get deleted because of other rules unknown to me until it's reverted a few minutes later. Sorry for any trouble I might have caused, it wasn't on purpose. It's advisable revert the changes you made to the page, if you don't, I will. -- (talk) 03:46, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Re: the bootleg games Wikia, you might be interested in WP:ELNO#12. (And after reading through Talk:Bionicle, there doesn't appear to be a reason for BS01's inclusion other than persistence on the part of affiliated editors.) As for Somari's pruning, the paragraphs were unsourced and parts of it were video game trivia. I'd only add that stuff back if you can source it in verified, secondary reliable sources (ideally those approved here). czar  04:08, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

@ I appreciate your efforts to help and I can understand why you thought the material you added was helpful. I'm sorry if I came off as overly brusque. I've seen far too many cases where this degenerates into revert wars and sadly there are a number of unfriendly administrative hurdles that have to be passed in order to get action on such cases. So I was actually going through the early motions required to eventually get the article protected. You aren't to blame here, though I would suggest using the article talk page in the future if an edit you've made is reverted. Anyway in this case I'm clearly dealing with a reasonable person and not a vandal so again I apologize for immediately launching into the page-protection pathway. -Thibbs (talk) 14:29, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Menacer article[edit]

Not to make you into the Russian source, but is there any chance you'd be able to find...

WTF? Unpredictable Views on" Light gun"
O Birling - Издательство Pubmix. com

That's the listing I found on Google Scholar in the depths of a Menacer search. Just thought I'd ask (in case you have the magic) czar  05:44, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Interesting topic. Unfortunately I haven't been able to locate this source but if you're looking for another editor whose Russian is almost certainly better than mine, you might contact User:Hellknowz. If he isn't busy he might be able to help you with some of the Russian sources. Incidentally, there's a bit of coverage of the Menacer in RetroGamer Issue #14 (the article covers Radica's 2005 Menacer re-release). I could get you that article if you'd like. Good luck either way. -Thibbs (talk) 02:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Okay—sounds good. Would you be able to pull that RG source? I was trying to search their archives all morning but didn't find any Menacer coverage listed czar  03:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Sure. I'll send you a note tonight. -Thibbs (talk) 03:26, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Some Additions to the Bop It Article[edit]

Hi Thibbs

There is still a lot of additions you can make to the Bop It Article.

First, Bop It Smash has been re-released as a Black Onyx special edition and re-released in the UK in a black model with light blue cuffs. Second, Bop It Tetris has been released in a Silver, a special edition. Third, there is a new Bop It game called Bop it Beats. The game features five game modes, Classic, Classic Party, DJ, DJ Party and Remix. It has has three levels of difficulty, Rookie, Expert and Lights Only. The commands are: Bop It, Spin It, Flip It, Scratch It, Reverse and Repeat. Finally, There is now a mini version of Bop It XT. There are also pure black versions of Bop It Shout and Bop It XT and a black onyx version of Bop It XT. The is also a sonic green Bop It XT and a Caliente Version. -- (talk) 12:25, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


Thanks for your hard work on the article, which serves as an admirable practice guide. I'd already used the Gallery format for sculptures in the Acis and Galatea article. By the time of your intervention, however, I was rapidly running out of time. Soon after, I left for Taiwan to put my experience of (paper) editing to use cleaning up after other editors in an art encyclopedia and, working a six-day week, have no leisure for Wikipedia. One point, however - now you've reformatted references, would it be a good idea to modify the list of things wrong with the article at its head? Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 05:42, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

No problem. I know all too well about time pressures. The reason I didn't remove the cleanup tags (and I'll mention this in talk) is that I worry that some of the other textual sources are likewise flawed. When the article makes a claim like "In Act 2 of XYZ's Opera of 1777, Polyphemus discovers Acis and Galatea and accidentally causes a landslide in his efforts to eavesdrop upon them" then it's fine to cite the opera itself as a source, but when the claim is "In 1777, XYZ wrote a politically allegorical opera depicting a clumsy and feminine Polyphemus who represented the Hapsburg Maria Theresa," or even simply "In 1777, XYZ wrote an opera," then the opera itself usually makes no such claim. The references that are not used to back up claims but rather to point to an example of the issue under discussion (e.g. the current Refs #21 and #26) should be removed from the reference section and I think these would best be converted into a notes section. They aren't references, but they are potentially helpful to readers. I'll set that up now. -Thibbs (talk) 12:59, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Dr90s back?[edit]

Any thoughts on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dr90s and Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time#"Widely considered" line? Cheers. Яehevkor 11:44, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me. I'll take a look. -Thibbs (talk) 12:59, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
OK I looked it over. It's hard to say. The edit warring over that one line is definitely the closest link. I notice that they're also quite aligned in terms of favorite topic areas. Zelda, Mario, Final Fantasy, Resident Evil, and Metroid are all top areas of interest to Dr90s. The thing that makes me most suspicious that it may be a new editor, though, is that the IP address is Irish instead of Japanese and last I knew Dr90s was a Japanese editor. I hope that helps. Thanks for working to restore the information and guard against this kind of vandalism. -Thibbs (talk) 13:30, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for that, I know there's not a whole lot to go on but I figured it was worth a look-see. Яehevkor 09:55, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Definitely worth scrutinizing. It's suspicious considering how that was one of Dr90s' favorite edits. And he's been quiet for a while so that would have been my first thought as well if I'd noticed the edits going on. -Thibbs (talk) 11:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)


I've indicated my willingness to participate. Andrevan@ 23:38, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

DieHard errors[edit]

I finally sat down to look at your EarthBound sources, and the first DieHard GameFan source is rife with content errors and typos. I'm not sure this source is reliable at this stage of its life. Thoughts? I am watching this page for the near future—no need to whisperback czar  15:14, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "at this stage of its life". Are you saying that the early issues of the magazine weren't reliable but the later ones got more reliable as time went on? That's probably true. GameFan used to be well known for its coverage of Japanese games way earlier than their release in the West. The staff had one or two writers who had contacts in Japan and they would translate a lot of material by hand. That probably explains spelling differences like using "Nes" instead of "Ness" (The original Japanese "ネス" really translates to "Nesu" so its Anglification is somewhat up to personal interpretation). I wouldn't really call those errors, but I'm sure that's not the only issue with the article. The truth is that GameFan was no stranger to scandal back in the day, and I definitely remember a translation scandal where aspersions were cast against the sometimes amateurish efforts and consequent errors made by the staff. In particular I believe some of Des Barres' translations were criticized (although if I remember correctly I think it was mainly due to the fact that he was quite young when he joined the staff). GameFan's coverage of Japanese games was sometimes months to years earlier than the games' Western releases, so I think GameFan can be a valuable source of info on Japan-exclusive content and coverage of details of Japanese versions that were lost during localization. But yeah, errors may well exist as well. My understanding is that the number and severity of errors decreased in later issues as scandals broke and time went on. The periodical has actually just seen a relaunch as of a few months ago. I'd be surprised if it had errors.
As far as how to use the source, I'd obviously exercise my editorial discretion and avoid repeating obvious errors, but I wouldn't worry about using it for its opinion-related coverage such as its rating. There's little cause for concern that they were unreliable in reporting their own opinions. I personally wouldn't be too concerned with someone citing it for factual matters that are probably true (especially if backed up by other sources), but I can understand your concerns over using it in light of the errors.
Sorry for the long response. I hope that helps. -Thibbs (talk) 16:27, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
I read about one of the scandals on the mag's WP article. There was the "Nes" but there also was amateurish "it's" and "they're" grammar stuff in those articles (which I imagine would be picked up by a basic copyeditor). Also a bunch of that first article's description is just flat-out wrong, and the claim that the Japanese version sold millions of copies... I don't know how much of this is made up. I used some of the review for its critical opinion, but not for facts. Anyway, might be a WP:VG/RS conversation to have, or at least worth adding a note about citing from this era of the mag's life. Thanks again for your help czar  16:34, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
That's a good point. There's tension between needing coverage from any usable source and Wikipedia's reliability standards for sure. Some WP:VG editors operate under the assumption that Wikipedia's goal to to cover every single game so if whole genres lack RS coverage (e.g. early browser-based flash games) then the project has to come up with an RS that covers this new genre. Obviously the idea behind WP:VG/RS is not to create RSes but to determine sources to be reliable based on the facts. If no RSes cover a genre then the fault is with the press, not with WP:VG/RS's standards. But I do sympathize with cases where coverage only exists in Japanese and English sources are in short supply. This issue has come up periodically at WP:VG/RS, and the particular situation is complicated by the fact that the source seems to be of variable reliability (not so reliable early on, and more reliable later). So it might be good to bring up in talk. Anyway glad to help. -Thibbs (talk) 16:46, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Note: I found out a bit more about the translation controversy by looking around online. Apparently Victor Ireland of Working Designs had become incensed at the GameFan review of Lunar 2 and began a campaign against Des Barres (who had written the review under the name "Nick Rox"), claiming that he had not played the games and that he did not understand Japanese well enough to translate it. A flame war developed on usenet, Ireland offered to give Des Barres a Japanese proficiency test, and a mocking website was erected against Des Barres. Big drama for the 1990s internet. There's more info on this and other scandals here, but I'd take it all with a grain or two of salt since so much of this stuff is bound up in petty personal politics and childish grudge-holding revenge. -Thibbs (talk) 17:04, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


Seems to be making up unsourced dates again, as you complained about at their talk page in November. I expect to be quite busy for the next few days, so I figured I'd mention it to you - I don't know what the "third-party review" you requested then was. Pinkbeast (talk) 13:18, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh the review I requested was posted to the WikiProject Video Games talk page (here). One of the admins there took a look and said that it didn't appear to be vandalism. I don't understand why Casper10 is unable or unwilling to communicate at this collaborative encyclopedia project, but that's his decision. Just revert anything that's unsourced and looks suspicious. Or add "citation needed" tags. I'm kind of snowed under for work just currently so I doubt I'll be able to look too closely into this situation. You could also post another note like I did at WT:VG, but no guarantees that this will have any effect obviously.
Thanks for caring enough to follow up on this, though. A lot of others would have just ignored it. -Thibbs (talk) 21:41, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
I fear we are quite weak against the insertion of plausible-sounding facts. I'll do what I can. Pinkbeast (talk) 01:19, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
I certainly agree. Especially when coupled with a lack edit summaries and an unwillingness to communicate, I find the unsourced addition of dates and other minutia (like height and weight, cost, sports statistics, etc.) to be frankly indistinguishable from vandalism. I'm not sure how it should be handled. There's a lot of apathy toward addressing it. You might want to check out WP:SVT if you're interested in this topic. -Thibbs (talk) 03:45, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Interview response from Frεcklεfσσt[edit]

  • Thanks Frεcklεfσσt! This is perfect. -Thibbs (talk) 22:37, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Re: Interview[edit]

Wow this interview is a bit long. And I'm not sure I have a lot to say about most of the questions. I will see if I have time later to write a bit more, but hopefully this glommed together comment is better than nothing. I joined the then-CVG project early on in my work on Wikipedia. I started the Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games/To Fix initiative to add infoboxes to all video game pages, which started in 2004. I was also involved in helping Super Mario 64 become a featured article, also in 2004: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Super Mario 64/archive1. I also spent time on the history of first person shooters, adding Faceball 2000 to the list, and in dungeon crawlers discussing the influence of Gauntlet on subsequent games. I know a bit about the early history of Nintendo especially in the USA. Some articles I created related to video games were Sega Sammy Holdings, N (game), Minoru Arakawa, Howard Lincoln, Howard Phillips, Nester (character), Shigesato Itoi, Camerica, XIII (video game), List of Star Control races, Universal Media Disc, Kirby Super Star, Mr. Do!, and various others. I also spent a lot of time uploading box art (this was before fair use doctrines evolved to where they are today). I was really a kid in those days - I spend a lot less time playing video games now, and my editing is mostly elsewhere too. #7, Wikipedia's broader policies take precedence over WikiProjects, this also applies to common name issues ie #8 (which is why the article is Sega Genesis). For #9, I completely disagree with you - civility and IAR are both extremely important, and contributions do not negate incivility, and similarly I disagree with #12 that experts or any kind of stratification can or should be implemented. Expert editing really never existed and couldn't. I'm not sure how the project or Wikipedia will change in the next 10 years. #15/#16 I started gaming on the NES and my favorites were SMB3, LOZ, Contra, the usual suspects. Kept playing through SNES Super Mario World, Yoshi's Island, Mario RPG, Donkey Kong Country 1/2/3, etc. Also a big fan of Super Metroid, Chrono Trigger, and come N64 Mario 64, Smash Bros., etc. Had a Pokemon phase as well. Went through phases of Halo, Diablo II, Counter-Strike, etc. as well as Starcraft, Civilization, and another favorite is Star Control II/The Ur-Quan Masters. Through emulation I have played many games that I missed the first time around, exploring the evolution of the medium through sometimes obscure titles that paralleled the Nintendo first-party games I mostly played as a kid - the Adventure Island/Wonder Boy/Monster World saga, Solomon's Key, Castlevania: Rondo of Blood, the Bonk series, the Sonic games, Popful Mail, Fantasy Zone. These days I may play a game of Starcraft 2 every once in a while. Love indie games like Cave Story or Luftrausers as well. I am also a software developer and have made some small forays into game development. Anyway, I hope this adds some color to your survey and I'm sorry for not answering everything or formatting it nicely. Feel free to refactor my comments. Cheers, Andrevan@ 17:35, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Looks great Andrevan. I'll work it into the final product and let you know when it's up. Thanks for your help! -Thibbs (talk) 18:35, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Re: Interview[edit]

Sorry about not being able to get the re-interview in. I tried to sit down and do it, but didn't really feel motivated to complete it and just went and played video games instead. It's a shame, the interview seemed like it would be enjoyable. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 06:42, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Ah well, it would have been nice to include your thoughts but I gave you little forewarning. I think I held out for too long hoping that more of the seriously ancient members would respond, but I guess it's just been too long and they're busy with other things. You may get a mention when we run a piece on prolific article creators, but that won't be for a few issues. Anyway thanks for reading the newsletter. -Thibbs (talk) 10:40, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

File an ABUSE report![edit]

Hey Thibbs!

Do It! You know who I am!-- (talk) 13:42, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Kallmann syndrome page[edit]


Thank you for the edit. I was meaning to have another look at the page today after the anonymous user had made those changes the day before. I am glad to see you did not change any of the English spellings of the scientific words back to the US version. I am trying to keep the spelling consistent throughout the article. Neilsmith38 (talk) 10:27, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

No problem, I'm glad to help. That particular vandal has been plaguing Wikipedia for years and years. -Thibbs (talk) 10:30, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

GameZero coverage[edit]

Thanks for any help you can throw at the issue. I understand where you're coming from and as I find the time to add material to the userfied talkpage, I will. Maybe I can revisit the request down the road. Cheers! BcRIPster (talk) 18:42, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

FWIW, I did go ahead and added it to the List of video game magazines page, since that is simply a list of magazines that have been published in reference to the history page, and the magazine is solidly referenced on there under the web based magazines. I put an initial ref to the period Internet Yellow Pages index for historical reference.BcRIPster (talk) 19:37, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Yeah I noticed that and it looks good to me. I'm generally interested in increasing coverage of VG journalism as much as possible. There's a wide world of journalism that is distinctly lacking from Wikipedia. -Thibbs (talk) 22:45, 1 May 2014 (UTC)


About changing links, what if the information is just wrong? Like an article says the Super Bowl took place in [[Chicago]] when it actually took place in [[Dallas]]. Would it be violating my terms to fix that?. TJ Spyke 15:34, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Just like deleting links, I'd say replacing [[Chicago]] with [[Dallas]] (in the situation you outlined) would be a grey area. You should ask the person who unblocked you since he's the one that laid out the conditions. Or failing that I'd just post on the talk page so that someone who watches the article can make the fix for you. What I wouldn't do is what you did here. That looks very much like a third violation of "TJ Spyke is banned from changing the target of any wikilink for a year" to me. You should give the unblocking admin a link to that edit when you ask for clarification on your restrictions since your "Chicago gets changed to Dallas" example is rather misleadingly innocuous. -Thibbs (talk) 20:59, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

re: landmaker[edit]

hi... um... what are you talking about? and how did you even find this talk page? please, stop calling me this despatche already. if they're doing some of the things i do, that's great i guess? more people need to bring these things up. (talk) 16:42, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Well I guess I'm just talking about the fact that you are using IP accounts now instead of your normal (previously blocked) user account. Don't get cocky. It's true that nobody detected your sockpuppetry until it was too late to do anything about it, but that doesn't mean you're dealing with complete idiots. You are very clearly the same person who was operating the User:Despatche account in November and the same person who was using an IP address to evade your block in late November and December. How many obscure-Japanese-video-game-title-obsessed Wikipedia-crusaders do you think are located in Davidson County, North Carolina? You can be sure that you're the only one. Your Despatche account has been unblocked now. I suggest you return to using it and stop sneaking around and pretending to be someone else. -Thibbs (talk) 20:54, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
...why did you revert those edits? you linked to VG/NONENG... which specifically says to do that. the japanese titles for both progear and shadowland are different from the english ones, so the other title needs to be pulled out. (talk) 16:53, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Yeah I'll take another look through those and all of your other edits this weekend. It's sure to be some interesting reading. -Thibbs (talk) 20:54, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
look, i really don't know what you're talking about. i may have edited as some past ip, but i have never made an account on this site, nor do i plan to, and this is exactly why. i do what i do and i move on.
please don't try to sell to me that i'm some kind of japanophile. i apologize that all of these video games happen to be japanese products made in japan, and i apologize that the most obscure topics are the ones that have these kinds of problems, but that's kinda why i'm doing this. problems, need to fix, etc.
all i care about is getting the right information in, and making that information look consistent. i don't like how overbearingly english-centric this place tries to be, to the point where important information gets hidden in plain sight seemingly because it's "ugly" and nothing more. never mind that it's inconsistent with various articles that don't do this, or that policy has never stood out against these kinds of changes. i'm not the iar type; if policy shuts me down, so be it. i just want consistency, and stability.
i'm not the only one to complain about all of these things. (talk) 01:08, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
You know exactly what I'm talking about. These games are childish in the extreme. You're fooling exactly nobody. -Thibbs (talk) 01:55, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
okay then... one, i'm looking at this editor right now; not so active, seeing as they haven't edited in half a year now, plus there's a giant good-bye letter on their talk page. two, it's kinda hard to "avoid scrutiny" when what i'm doing is apparently extremely controversial and everyone thinks i'm someone else anyway. three, you've kinda thrown the rest of my above comment under the bus over this, and that's kinda scary... i don't know what you had against this person, but can you please let it go? (talk) 13:19, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
Oh boy... Look, deception is kind of a pet peeve of mine. I hate to think that there are people who imagine that they can do whatever they want regardless of the community and that all of their "ignorant peers" will fail to recognize their little games. I used to be quite active in the sockpuppetry arena and trust me when I say that there are others who are much more adept at hiding their true identity than you. I don't have anything against you if you return to above-board editing under your actual username and abide by the community rules, but I do despise a rat who tries to slink by the wayside and carry on with the same nonsense he was engaging in before he got blocked. Sneakiness is not a solution to community-based rules. If you have a problem with the rules then you have to build up a case to change them; use persuasive rhetoric and demonstrate that you're a reasonable person with a good idea. The wrong way to handle such problems is to force your ideas on the community by aggressive rhetoric, demonstrate your contempt for the rules by knowingly and repeatedly violating them, and then to use sockpuppetry and deception as a backup plan.
Like I said, if you want to make a WP:CLEANSTART then feel free. If you want to carry on editing as a reformed Despatche then that's fine as well. It's not OK to use IP accounts to pretend you're a group of different people who also happen to agree with Despatche's counter-consensus point of view. This isn't a playground. If you want to play pretend games then find someplace else to do it. I will discuss whatever topics you want to discuss when you actually use your real username and stop pretending to be a different person. Until then I really have no appetite for these stupid games. -Thibbs (talk) 16:30, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, Cut the bullshit, Despatche. I've always been patient and forthcoming with you, but if you continue to play us for fools and keep denying who you are with dumb, unconvincing, evasive reasoning like this, then I will be no longer. Avoiding scrutiny in the way you do is a blockable offense and any further subterfuge will just make it worse.--Atlan (talk) 17:04, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Mischief Makers[edit]

Hey Thibbs—I saw that you have GameFan #57 (Sept '97), which has a feature or something on Mischief Makers. I can't find it online—would you be able to provide a scan? czar  02:56, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Sure, I'd be glad to. I'll probably get to it tomorrow. Poke me if I haven't sent anything by Monday. -Thibbs (talk) 03:39, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I think I found it. I have the spread from pages 76 to 81 and the Viewpoints review. Is there anything else I might be missing, e.g., another review section? czar  11:09, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
For GameFan's review articles there's always a review score posted in Viewpoints and then the actual review. That's all. In this particular case there's also the magazine cover image and an image in the ToC, but nothing worth searching for or uploading. Just pics. -Thibbs (talk) 11:15, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK: live and learn...[edit]

Thanks again Thibbs for your efforts to do the eval work on Template:Did_you_know_nominations/SpaceX_reusable_launch_system_development_program.

Things seem to have gone rather fast after that point a couple of days ago, and if I understand it right, the article ran in the DYK earlier today (UTC time). Cool.

Unfortunately, it did not run with the correct hook, and it ran early, not on the later date tied to a successful flight test as we had both thought. As you said, it was the first nom by me, and the first approval by you, so I get two takeways from how it appears to have run.

  • It was apparently an error on my part to not put the ALT1 hook we selected into the main hook part of the template, once we agreed that ALT1 was better than the shorter hook. It ran with the shorter hook that we didn't select. Too bad. I'll take a look at the article traffic statistics after another 24 hours or so (they are only updated about daily), but my guess is that, whatever upswing in traffic the article got, it would have got more with the catchier hook that included the Buck Rogers reference. So that is a "live and learn" lesson for me.
  • The article apparently did not go into the holding pen for a later date-synchronized appearance in DYK, as we had both thought would be best. Too bad again. On that one, I can only conclude that I don't know what to do to make that happen. But whatever we did in the template this time, it was apparently not what was needed to get it tagged/classed as a holding-pen DYK. Oh well, "live and learn."

I'm real glad I learned what I could on this first DYK attempt, and pleased you came along and helped it along on the eval side. Cheers. N2e (talk) 15:57, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Argh. Sorry about that. I guess I assumed that the DYK clerks would do a better job reviewing the discussion. I have more experience on the nominating side of DYK than the reviewing side, and I know from experience that it's pretty important to keep a close watch on the hook as it goes from nomination to prep area to queue. I've had to request prompt action to change the text of the hook in the past, when the editor who moved it to prep changed the message from what had been agreed upon. Sadly it's kind of hard to follow the process since it's spread across several pages, and if problems crop up, the only recourse may be to contact the editor who moved it to the prep area. If he's not available, then maybe IRC...? I don't know. Anyway I was happy to help and I hope we see a good uptick of views despite the problems. -Thibbs (talk) 22:47, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
No worries. The article did get 3000+ hits as a result of the DYK posting, and we both had the opportunity to learn. Looks like the "Buck Rogers" locution in a hook will wait for some other article about some aspect of reusable technology. Cheers. N2e (talk) 10:21, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for PETA satirical browser games[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Crush 40 OCR[edit]

Could you do a search on your OCR'd texts for "Crush 40"? Would be interested in what you find. czar  23:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Also I know you're also the king of Russian sources—any chance you can find:
Burring, Ethan. You're Nose is in My Crotch!" and Other Things You Shouldn't Know About" Sonic Team. Издательство Pubmix. com.
? czar  00:01, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Well for Crush 40, I wasn't able to find too much... It's the right time period for me: I focus on collecting material from 1993 to 2000, but it's the wrong company. I collect material primarily on Nintendo. That said, I did find Crush 40's Jun Senoue mentioned in connection to Sonic Adventure in the "Company Profile: Sonic Team" article from Retro Gamer #26 (p.27). I could get you a copy of that if you want.

The "You're Nose is in My Crotch!" title appears to me to be connected to spamming...
I don't really understand it, but lists titles including:

  • "You're Nose Is in My Crotch! and Other Things You Shouldn't Know about Wild: From Lost to Found on the Pacific Crest Trail" by Emily Rell
  • "You're Nose Is in My Crotch! and Other Things You Shouldn't Know about Birthing from Within: An Extra-Ordinary Guide to Childbirth Preparation" by Chris Skeat

And then supposedly you can download "You're Nose Is In My Crotch! And Other Things You Shouldn't Know About Yes! Book" by Grace Dilling online (you can search, I'm not going to post the link)
And there's an incomprehensible Google Book with a chapter titled ""You're Nose is in My Crotch!" and Other Things You Shouldn't Know About Imtiaz Ali"
I think they're just trying to dodge spam filters. I don't think it's a real source. The "Издательство" part means that the publisher is which is a Russian website that appears to be a vanity press... -Thibbs (talk) 01:57, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Appreciate all that. Also found it curious that a nose–crotch article would have anything to do with Crush 40. Anyway, thank you. @Red Phoenix: FYI & perhaps you'd want that Retro article if/when you work on Senoue's article czar  03:22, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
No problem. Yeah if Red Phoenix would like a copy of the Retro Gamer article (or the part covering Jun Senoue anyway) then I can provide it for him too. -Thibbs (talk) 03:53, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Thibbs, if you could do that for me, that would be fantastic. Red Phoenix let's talk... 12:45, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Sure, any time. I put a note on your talk page. -Thibbs (talk) 13:15, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Remove IGN wikis and cheats and faqs from WPVGRS search[edit]

First, thanks for the RS search. I can't seem to use it with my adblocks and whatever in Chrome, but it's my go-to in Safari. Do you think you could exclude IGN's wikis? ( and and All three are user-submitted and unreliable. Would save some tweaking on my end. czar  20:59, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Same for GamesRadar ( though I'm not sure how to get rid of it (something with inurl:cheats?) czar  21:12, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
  • And czar  21:19, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
I'd be glad to. I'll probably get to it later tonight. Thanks for the request. If you ever notice any other obvious tweaks (i.e. exclusions) please let me know them too. -Thibbs (talk) 21:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
OK I think I got it fixed up now. I'll update the records tomorrow. -Thibbs (talk) 02:28, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Appreciate it czar  03:06, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Found another: czar  13:08, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

YesY Done. -Thibbs (talk) 22:25, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • czar  02:33, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
YesY Done. -Thibbs (talk) 03:23, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • the subdomain appears to be all user-contributed czar  06:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
YesY Added and updated. Thanks again for your vigilance, Czar! -Thibbs (talk) 11:18, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Bop It Article[edit]

Hi Thibbs

Are you aware that there is a new Bop It out called Bop It Beats?

The game has six commands: Bop It Scratch It Spin It Reverse Repeat Flip It

It has five game modes: Classic Classic Party DJ DJ Party Remix

It has three levels of difficulty: Rookie (voice commands with reverse occurring near the end of the level.) Expert (voice commands with "repeat" meaning performing the previous command." LightS Only (lights and sound effects to help guide the player."

In the Classic modie, the game plays just like the old style of Bop It. You can't choose the difficulty level on this mode. It starts from Rookie and finishes on lights only. At the end of the game, the announcer says "Master DJ in da club!" In the DJ mode it is basically like Simon where the player has to remember the commands in a sequence. The Rookie level goes up to 4 commands and the level is completable. The Expert and Lights Only levels cheats at the six command pattern and the levels are uncompletable. The Party modes have the "Pass it" command. The maximum score in classic is 263 and in the DJ mode you can get 139. (talk) 10:12, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

re: Interview[edit]

Cheers, I'm in! Fire away. CR4ZE (tc) 15:47, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I've probably babbled on way more than I should have, but the interview's done. Now, do you want me by the pool for my close-up? CR4ZE (tc) 10:05, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
No that's perfect. It's good to give the readership something to chew on. Thanks for your help! -Thibbs (talk) 11:32, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Games scan[edit]

Hey, Thibbs. I'm helping User:GamerPro64 and User:czar on an Ion Storm collaboration, and the November 2001 issue of Games appears to have a long article related to the subject. If you don't mind, could you scan it for me when you have time? It would be a huge help. Thanks. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:17, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Sure no problem. It's in storage right now, but I'll get it out soon. Send me another note if I haven't gotten it scanned by the 8th. -Thibbs (talk) 22:55, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a bunch. Even though it's a snippet, I'll see if we can find a use for it. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 01:24, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Glad I could help out. Good luck with it. -Thibbs (talk) 12:37, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

List of species decision[edit]

Hi! I was wondering, which list of species do you think the Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous mammals (Erythrotherium, Rugosodon, Juramaia etc.) should go? Should they go in the List of fictional rodents or should they go in the List of fictional dinosaurs?

I also wonder if the List of fictional dinosaurs should be relocated from the Reptiles category to the Animals category, since Dinosaurs of the time consisted of a good mix of animal classes, although the word dinosaur generally refers to lizards.

So tell me what you think. Deltasim (talk) 13:31, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd say the placement of List of fictional dinosaurs within Category:Lists of fictional reptiles and amphibians should be taken as prima facie evidence that the fictional dinosaurs are limited to reptiles and amphibians. As such I'd list the extinct mammals in their respective fictional mammal lists. I think this makes the most sense due to the generic meaning of the word "dinosaur" as you've pointed out. The lede of the List of fictional dinosaurs should definitely be tweaked to reflect this, though. Specifically I'd change "...and applies only to species that originated during or after the Triassic Period" to "...and applies only to reptile and amphibian species that originated during or after the Triassic Period." -Thibbs (talk) 22:30, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

RE: Quick question[edit]

Hi Thibbs,

It's good to hear from you again. Thank you for the offer and I'm glad to see that the newsletter has continued to flourish. I'd be happy to help out. If you don't need the interview anytime soon, then let me know where the questions will be and I'll find some time. (Guyinblack25 talk 05:31, 19 July 2014 (UTC))

The interview won't posted until October so we have plenty of time, but I'll get it up within the next few days and drop a link at your talk page. Thanks for helping us out again. The newsletter must go on! :) -Thibbs (talk) 01:17, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Sounds good. :-) I'll wait for the link on my talk page. (Guyinblack25 talk 03:55, 20 July 2014 (UTC))

Hi Thibbs, same here, I am flattered that I have been considered. It's been about 3 years since I've done regular editing, I do wonder if anything I have to say is still relevant! Still, it's nice to see some familiar names (hi Guyinblack!) Marasmusine (talk) 12:40, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Ah excellent. I've gotten a bit behind, but I'll try to get on this as soon as I can. Certainly I'll be done before my upcoming vacation. I'll drop a note at your talk page too. Thanks for your help! -Thibbs (talk) 04:19, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

A pie for you![edit]

A very beautiful Nectarine Pie.jpg Thanks for the time and effort you put into providing sources for the improvement of Wikipedia! Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:38, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
And thanks again. I never used to like pie very much as a child, but now that I'm older it makes up an important food group in my pyramid of nutrition. :) -Thibbs (talk) 22:31, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Citation Barnstar Hires.png The Citation Barnstar
For going above and beyond to provide sources for other users for the betterment of Wikipedia. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:40, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Hey thanks, I appreciate it! :) I'm kind of addicted to collecting sources but I never seem to really have the time to put serious effort into converting them into articles so I'm just glad they can be profitably used by someone. -Thibbs (talk) 22:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Hey Thibbs, I don't suppose you have either of these do you? They're used in the article but I can't find copies of them online to confirm the info and/or see if there is anything else useful therein.
  • Barter, Pavel (February 2009). "Closed for repairs: The Vampire's kiss". PC Zone (203): 17. 
  • Rossignol, Jim (August 2008). "Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines". PC Gamer UK: 105. 

Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:09, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Sadly no. I don't have either one. -Thibbs (talk) 01:03, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
You might want to check with User:Muchness who made this edit or User:Eik Correll who made this edit, though. -Thibbs (talk) 01:17, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Secret of Mana[edit]

Hey Thibbs, can you provide me with the sections related to Secret of Mana from the 2007 May and 2008 December issues of Nintendo Official Magazine that you mentioned on the Secret of Mana FAC? As well as anything else you think might be helpful- seems I'm really missing out on hardcopy sources here. Thanks so much! --PresN 18:22, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi PresN, I don't actually have any copies of Nintendo Official Magazine. The WP:VG Reference Library link I posted shows that User:Ashnard has that distinction. I'd contact him if I were you. I do have a copy of the review from GameFan, though. I'll send it your way later tonight. -Thibbs (talk) 20:07, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks so much for the sources so far, and bits on the series as a whole are useful anyways- I'm slowly working my way through the whole series to get them up to GAN. --PresN 02:29, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks so much again! Most of the sources don't have much dev info, just reviews, but that's helpful itself and the Retro Gamer source is a goldmine- I'm going to be using that for a lot of articles to come. I certainly wouldn't turn down any Famitsu information you have- that's always notoriously hard to get, but super-helpful for a Japanese game. Even just a review score would be useful. --PresN 20:40, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Glad I could help. I'll take a look through the Famitsus I have and see if I can find anything. -Thibbs (talk) 22:59, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Librarian Barnstar Hires.png The Diligent Librarian Barnstar
Since you already have a Citation barnstar, I'll give you a Diligent Librarian barnstar- if Secret of Mana passes FAC, it will be entirely due to the references you managed to drag up for me, adding a wealth of much-needed detail to the article. Thanks! --PresN 22:09, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Like I told Darkwarriorblake in the thread just above, I'm just glad to put these sources to use after having spent all this time collecting them. And the Secret of Mana article looks awesome. You've done a great job with it! -Thibbs (talk) 01:06, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Oh yeah, and unfortunately I had no luck with the 1993 Famitsus that I have. I'm sure they covered the game but just not in the issues I have. -Thibbs (talk) 01:20, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
It's in issue 243 czar  12:09, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Ah! A fine discovery, Czar. Thanks. Sadly I don't have that issue on hand. I have to check my storage next time I'm back home, but I'm 99% certain I don't own that one. Anyway, pinging @PresN:. -Thibbs (talk) 12:26, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Discussion Invitation[edit]

You are invited for a discussion at Talk:List of fictional ungulates. Deltasim (talk) 13:33, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

YesY Gave my 2¢. -Thibbs (talk) 13:53, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

You might want to check out Talk:List of fictional rodents concerning LittleJerry's edit. Deltasim (talk) 12:29, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

YesY Weighed in. -Thibbs (talk) 13:16, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png Stay thirsty, my friend. Upjav (talk) 17:43, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Looks like a pink lemonade shandy on my busted screen... Very refreshing, though. Thanks, Upjav!

Tweaking My Article[edit]

Please let me know how I can tweak the article. I want to go look at the file they have about him at the art museum in Santa Fe to see if they have a list of collections that own his work, which would be important, and anything else I might have missed. But tell me what else I should do before I publish. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mimi.roberts (talkcontribs) 10:01, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

  • @Mimi.roberts: - Sure, I'd be glad to give some pointers. The article looks pretty good already and is really ready to be published. There are a few small things that I would recommend, but they are for the most part not necessary. Anyway here are the minor issues that stood out to me:
    • Section capitalization - Per MOS:SECTIONCAPS we are supposed to use "sentence-style capitalization, not title-style capitalization, in section and table headings." So section 1 ("Biography") is fine, but sections like section 2 ("Artistic Career") should be changed to ("Artistic career"). Things get a little tricky for sections 3 and 4 since they contain proper names, but I would make the word "Years" in both sections into "years".
    • Typos - I'm not certain about this, but I'm guessing that the "I" in "WIlson-Powell" should be made lowercase.
    • Possible overlinking - Per WP:OVERLINK, "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, links may be repeated." You have "MaLin WIlson-Powell" linked twice which is OK since they're in different subsections, but that I just wanted to make sure you really want the name linked twice.
    • Duplicate sources - References 1, 4, and 6 are identical and should be merged. The process is outlined at WP:REFNAME, but basically it entails the creation of a code name for the source that is then referred to instead of the source. The first time a duplicated source is used in the article you should use tags that look like this: <ref name=example>Example duplicated source</ref> instead of the normal reference tags (<ref>Example nonduplicated source</ref>). For all subsequent citations to the same source all you need to do is use this: <ref name=example/>.
    • Bare URLs - References 2, 5, and 7 all display bare URLS. This is just a style issue and it's not against policy, but the essay at WP:BAREURLS explains why it's a good idea to format references fully. In my personal view the minimum requirements for a formatted link include author's name, title of the work, publisher (if a journal or newspaper), and date. So for example with reference 7 I would change it from "<ref><ref>" to "<ref>Knight, Christopher. "[ Worth a Pilgrimage]." ''[[Los Angeles Times]]''. 12 April 1998.</ref>". Note particularly how I linked the title of the work "Worth a Pilgrimage" to the URL. To do this you simply enclose the URL in brackets and put a space between the end of the URL and the title. Here is an example: [ Title]. And in a reference it would look like this: <ref>Last name, First name. "[ Title]." Publisher. Date.</ref>. You can link the titles to the URLs in references 3 and 8 as well using this technique. This bare ULR issue is really not a requirement, but many consider it neater to link them to the name of the work cited.
  • That's all I saw in a quick overview. I'd be glad to assist you in making any of these changes (especially the references/citations issues) if I've made them overly complicated. Remember, these are all little tiny details and you should feel free to ignore any of them and just publish whenever you wish because the article is already good enough even without these corrections in my view. Write me back here again at any time. -Thibbs (talk) 12:03, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Thibbs! This is great. I think I will attempt them this weekend just to learn the ropes and will undoubtedly have questions as I go along. These same things apply to the Robert Colescott article that I expanded, so I can fix that as well. User:Mimi.roberts — Preceding undated comment added 03:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Glad to be of service. :) -Thibbs (talk) 04:21, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Thibbs I made the revisions that I was able to do but I couldn't do the references because they disappeared when I clicked on "edit". I went ahead and submitted it for review because unfortunately I found out that the subject died on Saturday and I'm anxious to get it published. Mimi.roberts (talk) 21:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)MimiMimi.roberts (talk) 21:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh I'm sorry to hear that. It seems like he was an interesting character. I know what you mean about the references disappearing when you click "edit." The page automatically shifts them all to the bottom when you see the final results displayed but when you look at the raw wikicode they actually remain in amidst the text. I'll make a few edits to fix up the refs tomorrow and I'll link the results here so you can see. -Thibbs (talk) 21:56, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
OK Mimi.roberts, I just updated the article and I wanted to point out the changes. So...
  1. The first thing I did was to merge the duplicate sources. I did that in this edit. You can see specifically what I did in this link by comparing the left side (representing the previous version of the article) with the right side (representing the new version). Anything deleted from the old version shows up on the left side highlighted in orange and anything added to the new version shows up on the right side highlighted in blue. At Wikipedia these comparison links are called "diffs" (see WP:GLOSSARY).
  2. Next I started working on the bare URL situation by adding details from the LA Times article I discussed above. You can see what I did in this diff which can again be analyzed by comparing the left (old version) to the right (new version).
  3. Continuing with the bare URLS, I made a small correction to the Taos News piece by simply shifting the URL so that it acts as a link from the title of the article. You can see that edit here. Then I completed formatting the Taos News piece in accordance with WP:REF. You can see what I did in this diff. Notice that I actually separated that reference into two because there are two sources listed: and But I didn't want to leave the link to as a bare URL so I fixed that up as can be seen in this diff.
  4. Then I finished up formatting the last 3 refs all at once. You can see all three of these changes in this long diff.
All of these edits are pretty wonky and are not necessary for the survival of a new article. They are really just polish. But hopefully you will find them helpful. Good luck with the review! I hope it takes place in a timely fashion. -Thibbs (talk) 12:19, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for the edits on Gamergate. I had no idea of how much coverage revolved around it and assumed it wasn't exactly studied much until I just viewed it today, where it has greatly expanded with many sources. So again, thank you for the edits, the article is looking great. Burklemore1 (talk) 07:09, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh it was my pleasure. I actually used to work at an entomological museum years ago so working on the article brought back a flood of good memories for me. Thanks for noticing the expansion. :) -Thibbs (talk) 12:05, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Agreed! Very nice work on the article, Thibbs! Cheers, jonkerztalk 15:41, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Oh thanks. I appreciate it. It seemed like a good time to expand given how many views the article has been receiving recently. -Thibbs (talk) 15:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Gamergate disambiguation[edit]

I edited the Gamergate disambiguation in line with wikipedia's neutrality policy and encyclopedic style. It currently doesn't reflect those as well as they could. I am going to ask you to not engage in an edit war about it, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:42, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I guess you decided not to look at the talk page I directed you to. No matter. I'm not one to edit war with someone who doesn't follow WP:BRD. Thanks for alerting me that you'd reverted yet again. I'll keep an eye on the matter. -Thibbs (talk) 18:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


I was attempting to undo the Mario/Wario defacement from 11:06, 11 September 2014‎ by - unsuccessfully it seems due to the conflicting intermediate edits. Maybe you could fix that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

I see. Well thanks for your efforts then. As you can see,'s edits were actually beneficial ones so you had reverted the wrong IP editor when I warned you... I thought you were the one vandalizing, but you were really trying to help. I'll leave a note on your talk page to that effect. Incidentally, the vandalism wasn't caused by's edits either. The culprit was, and he's now been warned. Thank you. -Thibbs (talk) 11:23, 17 September 2014 (UTC)