User talk:SNAAAAKE!!

Orphaned non-free image File:Future Past Psylocke.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Future Past Psylocke.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 18:41, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the, well, thank, on the Mileena edit. :') I sometimes just wind up going on these editing binges on a whim. sixtynine ^{• spill it •} 21:23, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kitana in other media, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Goro (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) 09:36, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

GITS

Based on Talk:Ghost_in_the_Shell_(franchise)#Proposed_merge_with_Ghost_in_the_Shell_.28manga.29, I've moved the Ghost in the Shell page to Ghost in the Shell (franchise) and made Ghost in the Shell redirect to Ghost in the Shell (disambiguation). Since you voted to oppose the merge, I assumed you would have no issue with the disputed page becoming a disambiguation since two of the articles it concerns are at GAN and the disputed page is likely to be at GAN by the end of the year. If you agree, drop a note or something, here or at the merge discussion. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:05, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Conduct in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 November 7. Thank you.

removed photos without justification

When I tried contributing my photos which I made available under free licenses User:Niemti removed them saying I shouldn't use my own work because it is a conflict of interest. So is the photographer of a photo not allowed to add the photo to a relevant article? But many photos I specifically produced them for adding them on specific Wikipedia articles, or I choose photos from my portfolio. I've produced hundreds of thousands of photos, the recent ones are more than 200,000 photos with full-frame and APS-C DSLR cameras, I wanted to test whether it makes sense to donate photos under free licenses, and apparently I wouldn't donate them or put them under free licenses if I knew beforehand Wikipedia doesn't accept photographers using their own photos on Wikipedia articles, I'd have preferred to keep my copyright as licensing photos for magazines/newspapers etc is what would keep me alive unless of course viewers of photos would want to paypal me or flattr me donations (in which case I'd prefer to fuck copyright anyway and let everyone use everything I create). I tested my idea to donate my photos by identifying some articles to which I wanted to add photos, then choosing relevant photos from my many-years collection or producing new photos specifically for the articles I wanted to add my photos, and I added the photos only to see them removed. Even when I tried to add photos to the articles taken by other photographers, they were removed, indicating some editors apparently had a personal issue with me. This is the reason I left Wikipedia and decided to fork the articles to which I want to add my photos and make them available thru my site. I admire the idea of a free encyclopedia as well as free photography, but I don't think it's good idea to let editors claim a conflict of interest when they see a photographer using his or her own photo in an article, it really destroys all motivation and all willingness to become part of the community, and instead drives people like me to fork the project, copying the Wikipedia articles and including the photos I want to put, and publishing the result independently but excluding the editors or the community and policies or culture which prevented me doing that as part of the Wikipedia community. Cogiati (talk) 22:31, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Conflict_of_interest#Photographers_and_conflict_of_interest

User:Binksternet's opinion from the above talk page is there's no conflict of interest when a photographer adds their own photo in a Wikipedia article. Cogiati (talk) 23:02, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Animal Crossing (video game) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |media = 1[Nintendo 64]] [[cartridge (electronics)|cartridge]]<br>[[Nintendo optical disc|GameCube Optical Disc]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:53, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bárbara Bermudo may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ] population in the United States. Bermudo joined the program in 2002 and co-hosted it with [ernando Del Rincón.<ref>[http://groups.yahoo.com/group/televisiondivas/ Television Divas]</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:28, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Flashback (1992 video game) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 2013, a [[Flashback (2013 video game)|Flashback]] remake by [[VectorCell]] was released for the PC]and consoles.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:17, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Video games featuring protagonists of selectable gender

Hi Niemti, I haven't really played any of the main Ultima games, but I know in both of the Worlds of Ultima games (Savage Empire and Martian Dreams) the main character, the Avatar, is always male. I suspect it's the same for the regular Ultima games. Defined very broadly, they may still belong in Category:Video games featuring protagonists of selectable gender, as they do have female characters the player can take control of. A player could even have them lead the party as a default, though the main protagonist will always be male. The category seems more useful for games like the Fallout or Elder Scrolls series, i.e., those with customizable protagonists. Otherwise, the likes of Final Fantasy VII and VIII would seem to count, as there are parts in both games where a female leads the party. A scope note on the category might clarify things. What do you think? --BDD (talk) 22:04, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• It occurs to me you may not have responded because there already is such a scope note there. The Worlds of Ultima don't fit those criteria; the character creation process determines your starting stats, but you play a male Aryan Übermensch regardless. Feel free to drop me a line if I've misinterpreted any of this. --BDD (talk) 20:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia

Hi. I saw at WT:WikiProject Video games#Liu Kang in other media that you had created a number of in other media articles by splitting them from the character articles. Your creations were missing the edit summaries required by WP:Copying within Wikipedia and WP:Splitting#How to properly split an article. Please provide them in the future. Thanks. (I see that you have redirected some or all of the new articles.) Flatscan (talk) 05:29, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

I know you probably just resent me, and much of WP:VG in general, and probably don't care, but regardless, I wanted to say thanks for cooperating and redirecting the "in other media" articles. Thank you. Sergecross73 msg me 15:15, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

DOA5U Arcade character official spelling name

it's already confirmed the name as Marie Rose on official japanese website. do not undo to a temporary false spelling name or you'll be the one whose going to be blocked ScottKazama 12:03, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

You're the one falsyfying references? Good to know. --Niemti (talk) 17:06, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Falsyfying? Wrong. ScottKazama 12:09, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, falsyfying. Including changing the article's title in the link. --Niemti (talk) 17:25, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Niemti, this video clearly has the name "Marie Rose" in English letters, and it's even in the video's thumbnail. You really should not rely on English language fansites for translations.—Ryulong (琉竜) 18:38, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Battletoads

Hi. I see you've jumped into editing Battletoads (video game). Now, I just wondered, what was with the ":|" summary in the edit in which you removed a bunch of stuff? AFAICT, in your subsequent edits you ended up incorporating most of it back, so in the end the text is pretty much the same as when I left it, only organized differently. Did I miss anything? Cheers! --uKER (talk) 17:52, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Hey good on you for getting rid of the fan art on Rikimaru's page. Also thanks for sticking up for the truth on the Dark Secret and Polygon Magic pages. NOT! Where were you on that one? I thought you'd have my back.

Razdower (talk) 02:27, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kitana, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Blue screen and Goro (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) 09:14, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

International cosplay photos to balance US-centric article

Images from cosplay conventions at various countries are needed in the cosplay article to illustrate the international reach of this wonderful hobby. Reverting the addition of an image which helps illustrate this international appeal of cosplay doesn't help to balance the predominantly American focus of various articles, including the cosplay article. I don't think that having pictures mainly from US cosplay conventions helps to create an internationally balanced encyclopedia. Cogiati (talk) 10:55, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

It'sx not "US-centric", there are pictures from Japan (2), France, Russia. --Niemti (talk) 11:05, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Southern Europe isn't represented though, the addition of a photo from Greece would balance the article. Cogiati (talk) 12:09, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

No one cares. There are no pics from the Central Europe too, I'm from the Central Europe, yet I don't insert my pics into the article for this stupid "reason" (while there are thousands of my pics on Facebook alone). Please go away. --Niemti (talk) 12:13, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Photos to show the impact of cosplay on the media

The article cosplay currently doesn't have images that show the media interest in cosplay conventions, photos showing journalists interviewing cosplayers would be very good. Cogiati (talk) 03:19, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

It wouldn't. Let it go. --Niemti (talk) 11:14, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Last Ninja, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Adventure (video game) (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) 09:14, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Pic to illustrate media interest in Tira cosplay

MTV Greece journalists interview a cosplayer dressed as Tira at a comics and cosplay convention

I think this picture (it shows famous local cosplayer Sofia Koutsouveli aka Sofia Lucifairy, the winner of Comicdom 2011 competition, she also happens to be my model in many pro photoshoots I've produced) would be good to add to the Tira (Soulcalibur) article to illustrate the media interest in her Tira cosplay as television journalists as well as many other photojournalists interviewed her and photographed her for her Tira costume whe made herself. I think the fact that a Tira cosplayer was interviewed for major television station is significant and it shows the impact of Tira outside videogames. In fact lately Tira cosplays are becoming much more usual here and the interview was discussed a lot in the local cosplay community, inspiring many other cosplayers to pursue dressing up as Tira. Cogiati (talk) 12:14, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Video games featuring protagonists of selectable gender

Category:Video games featuring protagonists of selectable gender, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 19:54, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Jessica Nigri

Hi. Please do not add or re-add unsourced or poorly sourced information to Wikipedia, as you did when you reverted my edits to Jessica Nigri. Webites with user-generated content, including YouTube accounts of uncredentialed users, Facebook fan pages, WordPress blogs, etc. are not reliable under WP:USERG, and notability of an article's topic must be established through secondary sources, and not the subject's own websites, which are both primary sources and self-published, which has nothing to do with the gamescon issue. Since you've accumulated over 64,000 edits over the course of the year in which you've been editing Wikipedia, you should know this. You would also know this if you bothered reading my edit summary and the policies I linked you to in it, which is rather ironic, given your obnoxious "learn2read and learn2hear" comments, which clearly violate WP:CIV.

If you have a valid, policy-based rationale for reverting another editor's edits, then provide it in your edit summary, and if you and the other editor disagree, discuss the matter on the article's talk page, and invite other editors to join the discussion to garner a sense of the community's consensus. But splitting hairs over the minor issue of the gamescom casing does not provide any justification for restoring Facebook fan pages and YouTube accounts as sources, an issue you did not address in your summaries. Do not engage in blind, knee-jerk reversions, as that constitutes edit warring, which is a blockable offense, as is your incivility. Nightscream (talk) 01:15, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

It's her own Facebook page, not "Facebook fan pages". I should better say: learn2listen (as for this interview). And it's you who are being obnoxious. --Niemti (talk) 01:22, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:

1. the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;
2. it does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities);
3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity;
5. the article is not based primarily on such sources.

These requirements also apply to pages from social networking websites such as Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook.

kthxbye. --Niemti (talk) 01:23, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh, the "notability of an article's topic was established through secondary sources" already many months ago back ,when it was smaller than 10 kb, even before she even started professionally modeling on the scale she does it now (there was an AFD and it passed). And welcome to Wikipedia. --Niemti (talk) 01:30, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Regarding your latest revert of my edits in which you stated in your edit summary, "goto WP:USERG, press ctrl+F, type "facebook" in the search bar, learn2read", as well as your similar message above:

• First of all, the passage you indicate states, "These requirements also apply to pages from social networking websites such as Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook" is irrelevant, since a Facebook fan page is a user-generated source, and not a self-published source, since a self-published source would be Nigri's own Facebook page, and not a fan page. A fan page, however, being a user-generated source, is not reliable under WP:USERG, which is part of Wikipedia's Reliable Sources policy.
• Second, even if the Facebook page were a self-published source, then the portion of WP:SELFPUB that you point to would clearly support my position, not yours, since the passage states that the prohibition on self-published sources also applies to social networking sites like Facebook. I'm not sure why you think it somehow bolsters your position, but it does not. If I'm wrong, please explain how.
• In addition to WP:SELFPUB, any source that originates from the subject, such as their own personal website, Facebook page, YouTube account, etc. is also a primary source. In addition to the need for notability to be established by secondary sources, articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources, as indicated by WP:PSTS. They can contain some primary or tertiary sources, but the accomplishments that form the bulk of it should not be secondary ones, which is clearly the case with all videos from Nigri's YouTube account (to say nothing of the all the other YouTube videos from accounts that do not appear to be reliable sources). So whether notability was established months ago is irrelevant. There's nothing wrong with relying on primary sources for innocuous, non-self-serving or non-aggrandizing information like where the subject is from or where they grew up, as I do this myself in BLP articles. But anything goes to the reason why a subject is notable, regardless of whether sources already in the article were sufficient during an AfD, needs to be a secondary one. An article only needs two or three secondary sources to qualify for notability, but that doesn't mean that everything after that should be a primary source free-for-all.
• You did an apparently blind, mass-revert of all of my edits, and not just the removal of the Facebook fan page cites. You did not address the issue of the YouTube videos, the missing citation publication information that I added to some citations; wikilinks; etc. By reverting all that material without providing a rationale for it or discussing it, you are engaging in edit-warring, which is a blockable offense.
• Lastly, you are continuing your violations of Wikipedia's Civility policy with your rude "learn2read" remarks, which is also a blockable offense. If you feel that I've been obnoxious, as you indicated above, then please quote the statement or statements on my part that you feel fit this description and we'll discuss them.c

If you have a specific counterargument, then please provide it in a civil manner, either here, or on the article's talk page. Otherwise, the next time you violate WP:USERG, WP:PSTS and WP:SELFPUB by restoring material supported only by self-published, userg-generated or primary sources, WP:EDITWAR by doing reverts without discussion, or and WP:CIV with your rude comments, you will be blocked from editing. Please familiarize yourself with the linked policies and guidelines and make an effort to resolve your conflicts with other editors in a civil manner. If you cannot do this, you will not be permitted to edit here. Nightscream (talk) 02:02, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I have specific counterargument: I don't violate any WP:SPERG. Go and see where's the only (1) instance of "Facebook" on the entirity of Wikipedia:Verifiability, before coming up with any sort of pseudo-rules you imagine next. --Niemti (talk) 02:10, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I do not what you mean by WP:SPERG. Did you mean WP:USERG? Please clarify. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:13, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Click your own link. Come on. Find "Facebook" there, on this page. Come back to me and appologize very, very nicely. And yes, all of these YouTube videos there are perfectly fine. After an aplogy, revert yourself (including your "the missing citation publication information" that wasn't needed and wikilinks that weren't needed).--Niemti (talk) 02:15, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I provided many links. Which one are you referring to? If you want to reference a particular passage on a policy or guideline page, then why not do so? If you're referring to the passage at WP:SELFPUB, that passage indicates that that policy also applies to social networking pages like Facebook, which I pointed out to you above. So a Facebook page is out, whether it's Nigri's own page (which is prohibited by both WP:PSTS and WP:SELFPUB), or a fan's page (which is prohibited by WP:USERG). If I'm misunderstanding you, then please elaborate.

Those YouTube videos are not "fine". Anyone can post a YouTube video. That's why it's called user-generated content. Anyone who's been editing here for any significant amount of time knows that any webpage that can be created by a non-credentialed, anonymous web user is not considered reliable under WP:IRS. I'm surprised that someone who's amassed the edits you have in a year does not know this. But if you don't believe me, by all means, ask other experienced editors and admins. Or ask the Reliable Sources Noticeboard.

The publication info of a cited source, such as its author, date, title, publisher, etc. is indeed needed, which is why there are parameters for that information in the citation templates used on Wikipedia, and is an integral part of Wikpipedia's Citing Sources policy. Saying that it is not necessary to give the publication info of a cited source not supported by the widespread practices of the editing community here.

As for your request, you've insulted me, and repeatedly, and have offered no response when I asked you to provide instances in which I was not civil to you. And even if I had been rude to you, you certainly have offered no words of regret for your own unjustified condescension, while I've tried to keep this discussion cordial. So I see no reason for an "apology". Nightscream (talk) 02:28, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Click either "WP:USERG" or "WP:SELFPUB", it's the same page. Then find "Facebook". It's there. Find it. Read it (do it carefully, if you can't read it normally and understand properly). Then revert yourself and apololize, in this order. (There's no "Facebook" at "WP:PSTS" which is about the articles about "an event", while this is an article about a person.) And in case if you're a case of an edit warrior who really can't read, I take this to admins because this is ridicalous..) --Niemti (talk) 02:37, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

You are stepping over the line on NPA. --MASEM (t) 02:39, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

What? Oh, hey, you tell this guy. --Niemti (talk) 02:42, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Wherher it's listed or not, it's pretty clear that a FB account is going to violate SPS...by the definition of how FB operates, you know? Sergecross73 msg me 02:44, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Regarding your apology and revert: Do it ASAP because it's an article that's "7035 in traffic on en.wikipedia.org" and you inflicted a lot of damage to it and to my hard work. If you want an apology, then you're going to have to explain two things:

• The statements on my part in which I was incivil towards you.
• The reason why I owe you an apology, but you do not owe one to me, when your comments have been far more unambiguously and repeatedly incivil than mine.

I have no problem admitted when I'm wrong, and apologizing when appropriate, and have done so before. But you don't get an apology by merely dogmatically demanding it, especially when you refused to answer my point above regarding where I was incivil and about your own incivility. The traffic experienced by the article does not change this.

As for your "hard work", your hard work was adding 90 self-published sources, primary sources and user-generated sources to an article, which outnumbers the 76 or so that did not unambiguously violate those policies (which include some that I left in the article simply because I wasn't sure about them). I'm sorry that you had to see your work undone. But sometimes it happens on a collaborate project like this, and if it makes you feel any better, I've had to see my work undone, particularly during my early days editing here. But when editors familiarize themslves closely with the most important core policies and guidelines, this is less likely to happen on a large scale.

Click either "WP:USERG" or "WP:SELFPUB", it's the same page. Then find "Facebook". It's there. Find it. Read it I have. And I responded to this point of your repeatedly above by quoting the passage in question (as have you), which states that the policy that prohibits self-published sources also applies to Facebook. If this is wrong, then explain how. Merely repeating "search for Facebook, search for Facebook" ad nauseam does not constitute an explanation. Please elaborate on why you think that passage supports your position, rather than mine.

...if you can't read it normally and understand properly... I notice you spelled the word apologize as "apololize". Does that count?

Since you have refused respond to my questions or requests for clarification directly, and continue to violate WP:CIV, I will not continue this discussion. I will not return here unless you contact me on my talk page to inform me that you will cease your rude comments, and directly respond to my points. And if you attempt to revert the article, you will be blocked, and the article may be protected from further edits. Take care. Nightscream (talk) 02:46, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Jesus Christ you dudes: "Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field," (btw: I'm pretty sure jessica Nigri is "a published experts in the field" of Jessica Nigri, or cosplay npw seriously speaking) These requirements also apply to pages from social networking websites such as Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook." Seriously. GOD. I CITED IT RIGHT THERE ABOVE ALREADY. HOW CAN IT BE ANY MISUNDERSTOOD I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL. I'm taking it to the admins. --Niemti (talk) 02:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC)