User talk:Kariteh

Characters of Final Fantasy III

I think we've had consensus to merge this article to the two FFIII games for over a year, so let's do it. I'm a little overwhelmed with how to do it, and where to redirect this article to. Probably the original game, right? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the original game. I think I had said something about the Nintendo DS version article but it was before it became GA (there were no Characters section yet, not there is). The Characters article can probably just be merged/redirected to the original game article now. I think the less important characters should be mentioned in the Story section rather than the Characters section though. Kariteh (talk) 07:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey apparently your the person who called me on the ffIII change so I've just come to justify that change. Both the final fantasy I and II articles say nintendo entertainment system but in the final fantasy III article nintendo family computer is used instead. I believed this inconsistency was confusing and so changed it and had no intention on vandalising the article. If you feel the nintendo family computer is the more accurate term being it the name of the japanese version of the console may I suggest you modify the final fantasy I and II articles just for the purposes of clarity as I was some what confused when I saw the change in name of the platform in the final fantasy III article, such a modification I feel is necessary to avoid this confusion to either the final fantasy III article or the final fantasy I and final fantasy II articles. --Hybrid360 (talk) 21:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

The Famicom (full name Nintendo Family Computer) is the Japanese version of the Nintendo Entertainment System. Since this is the English language Wikipedia, "Nintendo Entertainment System" can be used as a general name when we're speaking about all versions of the console. But when an article refers to the Japanese version of the console exclusively, we're kind of forced to use Famicom. Kariteh (talk) 21:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I thought this might be the case as to why it would be more accurate but if thats the case for the final fantasy III article shouldn't the final fantasy II article be edited as like ffIII the game was never originally released outside japan on the nintendo entertainment system but the article still states it was released on the nintendo entertainment system. So as in final fantasy III's case wouldn't nintendo family computer be more accurate? --Hybrid360 (talk) 21:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Good catch, I didn't notice it. I've changed Nintendo Entertainment System to Nintendo Family Computer in the Final Fantasy II article now. Kariteh (talk) 21:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks, it's good to know that that has got sorted out then --Hybrid360 (talk) 21:50, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:World Destruction logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:World Destruction logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Yoshitaka Amano

The delisting procedures say that anyone can delist an article if it is clear that the article does not meet the Good Article criteria anymore. Sending it to GAR is not required before a delisting. If you disagree, you can take it to GAR for relisting. To clarify this, I've also left a note at Wikipedia talk:Good article reassessment#Delisting about the situation, as I'm curious as to whether people are allowed to just revert a delisting if they disagree, and to confirm that I followed the correct procedures. Until they say otherwise, however, please let the delistings stand. Collectonian (talk) 00:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I won't take it to GAR for relisting since from the start I agreed with you. It's just that I saw Juhachi's edits on Air (visual novel) and I thought the reviewing and discussion were mandatory procedures; apparently they're not. Sorry about that. Kariteh (talk) 07:53, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

On the Okami Wii image..

You tagged it with {{watermark}} which implies that the image was taken from site with the watermark added by the site. In this case, while there is a watermark on the image, this is the image on the actual cover (the cover image I got being from Amazon); the IGN watermark was a snafu that is discussed on the article itself in that an image from IGN (with its watermark) was pulled into the cover image, leaving the IGN watermark in place. The intent of the watermark tag is for a very different use, and in this case, it does not apply here (while Capcom is releasing a IGN -watermark free cover image, the IGN watermark-containing version of the cover is necessary to keep per this event). --MASEM 06:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia anyone can edit! I noticed that you have been having an 'edit war' over at the Koopa Troopa article. Wikipedia values your contributions to this one-of-a-kind project, but we have strict rules that we take very seriously to ensure that the quality of the project is not diminished by individual users. Reverting an article (that is, changing the article from the present version to an older version) is at times needed and appreciated, but other times can be dangerous. The dangerous times comes after the same article has been reverted three times by the same user in a short amount of time. As evident from the history at Koopa Troopa, you have been participating in an 'edit war' by reverting the article constantly. Please stop reverting the article and discuss your proposed changes on the article's talk page instead of 'bullying' your point of view with reversion. Thank you, Ask D.N.A.- Peter Napkin (talk) 23:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC) p.s. If you have any questions regarding how Wikipedia works and the many rules involved in editing, feel free to drop me a message at my talk page.