You should totally push this one for FA status when you get the chance, it looks awesome, just thought I'd let ya know! Also, I fixed up FFIII DS a bunch, let me know what you think :) [[User:Judgesurreal777|Judgesurreal777]] 05:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
You should totally push this one for FA status when you get the chance, it looks awesome, just thought I'd let ya know! Also, I fixed up FFIII DS a bunch, let me know what you think :) [[User:Judgesurreal777|Judgesurreal777]] 05:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
== Spoiler warnings. ==
While, as you could read on the related page, I did apologize for using excessive profanity in my rant on the latest crusade against spoiler warnings, I find your threat to block me from editing based on that edit quite insulting. I know that kids in their teens think they know everything and always believe they have the moral high ground, but seriously, even a tiny look at my contributions indicates my desire to improve this project, usually calm and even tone in such debates, and hundreds of helpful edits, and I find it quite offensive that you generalized and threatened in your post on that thread. If, as my admittedly brief and possibly mistaken research indicates, you are one of those anti-spoiler-warning crusaders I am irritated against, it makes it an irresponsible and biased display of your mop and bucket, as well. [[User:Dharmabum420|dharmabum]] 07:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). Place comments that start a new topic at the bottom of the page and give them ==A descriptive header==. If you're new to Wikipedia, please see Welcome to Wikipedia and frequently asked questions. This talkpage design is based on my userpage design created primarily by User:Sango123.
Haha, I just noticed we have the same name. Oh, and sorry for adding that spoiler warning, that was pretty silly of me. Tyler15:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Idea
you should make a template like urgent FACs or FARs except copyediting requests. Maybe article name, status, and reason. Seems like you are getting legit spam from people who need help (I was a lucky one), but you are getting a huge talk page from a bunch of "help me please"'s. Just an idea.--Clyde (talk) 00:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think if people contact you directly they believe they will get a better response rather than going to the LoCE. The requests for copyediting go back as far as January, I myself having a request going back to March. This could be easily frustrating combined with the fact that the VG peer review has severely slowed down, and the peer review has a backlog has like nothing I've ever seen. You do your thing, but I only wish you could clone yourself a hundred times. BTW, what happened to the third user you adopted? Maybe left?--Clyde (talk) 02:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Is there any good Final Fantasy or RPG game not on a Sony system?
P.P.S. You might want to put a sign that says no copyediting right now.
I have my doubts that the League of Copyeditors will be able to address User:Tony1's recent opposition, if my request is ever responded to (request was placed on April 27, with no response yet). I had their help with F.E.A.R. awhile back, and found them to be pretty good, but not good enough to satisfy Tony1's 1a-based FAC objections. If you aren't too busy, could you give the article a run-through at some point? JimmyBlackwing17:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the copyedit request—I didn't know that you had stopped taking them. User:Zeality has cleaned up the prose, so would you mind re-evaluating the article, and striking your oppose if it's up to your standards? JimmyBlackwing23:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you could fold Gilgamesh and Cid articles into this new one, since it seems that they don't have much prospect for having enough out of universe info to stand on their own. :) 69.253.238.2721:26, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I know you are NO LONGER ACCEPTING COPY-EDIT REQUESTS. Because you NEED TO FINISH WHAT I BEGAN WITH THE FINAL FANTASY WIKIPROJECT. ;) But I was hoping that you would copyedit Return of the Jedi as it is the last film in the Star Wars film series articles and I'd really appreciate your contribution. :) The Filmaker22:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like screaming over this featured topic nomination. They say they want a main series page, but I don't think one is feasible, and if it is than I would need to get some people to help put it together. Any thoughts? Judgesurreal77718:50, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
FFTA Jobs
While I appreciate your initiative and agree that the article was enormously crufty, wouldn't you say that a small discussion could have preceded the redirect? I myself am fond of the concept of including only jobs unique to Final Fantasy Tactics Advance and perhaps moving the article to a subsection of the main game page- for instance, inclusion of only specific, unpreceded jobs, like the Juggler.
Deckiller has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Deckiller's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Tyler!
My guardian angel!Thank you, Tyler! :) And thank you for you kind words the other day at my talk page - they meant incredibly much to me. This is like, what, the umpteenth time you defend me... I think I'll officially appoint you my personal guardian angel :) Have a wonderful weekend, sweetie! Phaedriel - 01:43, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, both instances should be removed. Are you an admin? (Sorry, that might be taken as an insult.) Always good to intercede and improve language while other disputes surround a text. Tony11:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"Its" is readily understood in the context, yes? Here, both anys can be excised pure and simple, giving a cleaner wording that has more authority. Tony11:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
""Material not supported by sources may be challenged and removed at any time." I prefer ""Material that is unsupported by sources may be challenged and removed." Tony12:40, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think your merge may have been premature. I disagree with it on two levels: first, as it currently stands, a huge loss of information has occurred. At a minimum, fixing it would expand the Characters of Final Fantasy VI page by an amount that perhaps would not be healthy for it. Personally, I prefer individual pages, but I can see the need of merging, so long as no information is lost.
Secondly, if you are going to keep pages for the "main" characters only, then you should most definitely not just keep Terra and Locke. Although they are important characters, they cannot be said to be the main characters in any sense. FFVI was not like the other final fantasy titles in using a main character and exploring their interactions with others. In FFVI, the emphasis was on a group of characters, and it explored many of them quite evenly. Keep in mind that it is entirely possible to beat the game with only Celes, Edgar, and Setzer in your party, and it will at once be realized that Terra and Locke are NOT the main characters post world of ruin.
Anyway, I feel the situation must be fixed in some way or another, and am calling for comment from other users on the talk page page. If you wish, you may defend your reasons for merging there. Thaks in advance. — EricHerboso06:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In other news, I just received my (legitimate) copy of FFX International today AND I finished my last AP exam for the year. Life is good. Axem Titanium21:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Deck, quick little request. Can you restore the MFD tag at the top of WP:SPOIL since the MFD has been reopened? Another admin protected the page so I can't do it myself. Axem Titanium03:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It got promoted to FA afterwards, but I'm a bit concerned with how quick it was promoted - I only got 3 supports, and 2 were from Slayer WikiProject members. I'm someone who plays fair and square, but that promotion makes it look like fan support :(. Wish it was left open for a few others to comment on it before it was promoted. Oh well... LuciferMorgan23:17, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My first Mother's day!
Sweetheart, if you forgive me the slightly-more-than-24-hours delay, I'll once again thank you for your warm thoughts regarding my first Mom's day, and I'll tell you it was unforgettable. No fancy parties, no gifts - just me and my princess, the two of us alone. I took her to the park, and enjoyed the walk wih her in my arms. It sounds simple, but trust me, Tyler dear, I'll never forget it as long as my heart beats. Once again, thank you for thinking about me, guardian angel :) Love you, Phaedriel - 03:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Quick Risk query
I was just wondering if you could help me out. Earlier I was working on an article to complement the main Risk board game article. It ended up being decided by Robdurbar that it should be on one of my personal user pages where I could edit it until it was more finished. Here's the discussion if you need/are interested in seeing it for clarification.
Basically I just want you to move the edit history along with the article. I would have asked Robdurbar to do it but he has left wikipedia since. You don't need to worry about linking it to the main Risk article, I can do that. If you have any questions or need any clarifications please feel free to ask. Cheers. b_cubed17:51, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response, I have two quick questions. 1) You mentioned that the font colors should be removed. I'm assuming that you meant the wikilinked names of the boards (red and blue). Should I get rid of both or leave in only the blue? 2) Perhaps this is a stupid question but what exactly do I need to reference? Don't take this question as me saying I don't want to, however, I would prefer to only reference that which needs to be referenced. FYI my main intent for putting this into the namespace was so that other people could work on it with me and help me finish it. I'm not quite sure that I see the difference between this and a typical stub article that is floating around. But yes, thank you for all your help thus far. :o) b_cubed22:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Final Fantasy IV
I had a thought, wanted yours....what do you think of, at some point, merging the characters and locations of Final Fantasy IV into "World of Final Fantasy IV"? I am pretty sure that article could be GA at some point, since the DS release will hopefully give us a big chunk of development info. Judgesurreal77720:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One other thing, I've been trying to trim down Airship and put it into the Common Themes of Final Fantasy, but I am having some trouble shaping it down. Judgesurreal77701:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I really thought I could do this time. I really thought I could have a disagreement with someone and work out on my own, without having to call and admin into the mix. But now they're calling for a third party and I was wondering if you could give your two cents at Talk:Insensitive (House episode), it's been going for a few months. If you want a good example of what the articles looked like before I started editing them, here's a link: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Insensitive_%28House_episode%29&diff=108649839&oldid=108627795
Every House episode article had been formatted with this. Note the empty sections which were placed in every article regardless if they were filled with anything. Including the Pilot episode article that I helped get up to FA status. I hope you can help me out here. The Filmaker03:24, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sooooo..... I know you're busy, so should I ask someone else to check it out or do you think you'll be able to take a look at it in the next few days? The Filmaker05:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Target audience
So, sorry to insult you. I agree with much of what you say about what WP should be. I'm glad you arn't aiming at an educated elite. But
My comment was relevant because much of the argument about spoiler warnings is really an argument about the purpose of WP, and hence about its "target audience".
It is elitist to divide readers of WP into "target audience" and "other". People looking for information about whether to play a game are still looking for information, and should be catered for. Well written articles on WP can do them a service that review sites and amazon can't.
My models for a "scholarly" encyclopedic approach to works of fiction are the massive John Clute encyclopedias of Science Fiction and Fantasy (because I happen to own them). Of course these are much less detailed than WP but their focus is indeed on critical reactions; they highlight innovations but don't obsess on plot: even central works are generally not described in enough detail to spoil the enjoyment if you read them later. Because this sort of info provides a pretty reliable guide to quality, I've read and enjoyed many books years or decades after they were first published which I otherwise wouldn't have bothered with. This kind of serendipity was certainly one of Clute's main aims, and I don't see why it shouldn't be for Wikipedia.
I think it would make an excellent WP article, with full verifiability, if, some time after a game was released, the editor collated major reviews, especially in specialist game mags, and summarised the major comments, along with things like sales figures, awards, etc. Of course this info is available at review sites, but the reader has to do the collation himself, and doesn't get the benefit of WP editors' consensus checking of reliability. Even better would be to describe how later games (& other stuff) was influenced. Obviously this would refer to notable features of the game play. It seems to me this is what WP:WAF is advocating.
You seem to think a "complete" description of the plot is essential. But a plot summary is always a summary... the editor has to decide how much to include. Who benefits from a ton of detail? Not a prospective player...it's bound to contain spoilers. Not an experienced player...they know it already. Presumably, someone who has no real interest in the game but needs to know this info. I can think of a few examples, but nobody I'd want to spend hours working for free to help.
Bottom line. IMHO an encyclopedia is a tool for providing relevant information. Doing so in a way which satisfies the demands of as many readers as possible is a good. Too much information can actually be off-putting to most readers and serve the interests of a very few. Spoiler warnings at least give visual clues to help skip info unwanted by probably the large majority of readers.
Hmm, if you want to continue this discussion, let's do it here. 2 responses to your latest comments: agree FF7 is at least 2x too long...seeing as it was repeated referenced that's the one I checked out. But mainly, we have plenty of unwelcome editors, but I'd say no unwelcome readers (a word I used above with care). If they just come to read they are looking for info and we should try to supply and not scare them off. PaddyLeahy20:31, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
World of FF8
You should totally push this one for FA status when you get the chance, it looks awesome, just thought I'd let ya know! Also, I fixed up FFIII DS a bunch, let me know what you think :) Judgesurreal77705:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Spoiler warnings.
While, as you could read on the related page, I did apologize for using excessive profanity in my rant on the latest crusade against spoiler warnings, I find your threat to block me from editing based on that edit quite insulting. I know that kids in their teens think they know everything and always believe they have the moral high ground, but seriously, even a tiny look at my contributions indicates my desire to improve this project, usually calm and even tone in such debates, and hundreds of helpful edits, and I find it quite offensive that you generalized and threatened in your post on that thread. If, as my admittedly brief and possibly mistaken research indicates, you are one of those anti-spoiler-warning crusaders I am irritated against, it makes it an irresponsible and biased display of your mop and bucket, as well. dharmabum07:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
