User talk:Ryulong

Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page by using either the "new section" tab or this link.

Please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). If you do not sign your comments, I may remove them entirely.

Please keep your comments short and to the point. I do not want to read essays on this page.

I will revert and ignore any basic template messages used on my talk page. If you want to talk to me, use your own words.

I prefer to keep conversations on one page. If I left a message for you on your user talk page, I prefer to respond to you there.

My local time: August 2024 22 Thursday 3:17 pm EST
Archives
2—6/06 7/06 8/06 9/06 10/06 11/06 12/06 1/07 2/07 3/07 4/07 5/07 6/07 7/07 8/07 9/07 10/07 11/07 12/07 1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08 1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/09 7/09 8/09 9/09 10/09 11/09 12/09 1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10 1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11 1/12 2/12 3/12 4/12 5/12 6/12 7/12 8/12 9/12 10/12 11/12 12/12 1/13 2/13 3/13 4/13 5/13 6/13 7/13 8/13 9/13 10/13 11/13 12/13 1/14 2/14 3/14 4/14 5/14 6/14 7/14 8/14 9/14 10/14 11/14 12/14 1/15

---

When I find that the conversations or issues discussed here have either ended or resolved, they will be inserted into my archives at my own discretion.—Ryūlóng

---

Checkmate Four

It is much simpler to put them under "guest actor" as we'll end up re-ordering the footnotes each time there's a new member of the Checkmate Four featured. Seeing as they're only semi-regular players, it's easier to put them listed under "guest stars."—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

But they're NOT Guest actors, they're just regular who appear once and a while. It's no different a role when compared to Seeshomaru of Inuyasha or Naruto's Gaara. Besides, you can leave the reordering to me. Fractyl (talk) 02:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

They're not regular actors either. It's much easier to leave things as they are (not reorder the "notes" section) than it is to keep reordering them.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

But are the Checkmate appearences any different to Kengo's or the Spider Fangire? The two are also reoccuring major figures in the series story. Even in most anime, the major villians don't appear in every episode. Fractyl (talk) 02:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Spider Fangire has been there since episode 1. Kengo has been announced as a character prior to episode 1. The Checkmate Four aren't appearing in every episode following their initial appearance, and reordering every single footnote is a pain in the ass because they portray that there's a different order. Also, this is not an anime.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Just saw the end results, I can live with this. Fractyl (talk) 03:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Meatpuppets

Hi. I saw your edit here and I was wondering if you could also take a look at this user. The account was created at 00:21, 25 May 2008 [1], at which point this "new user" played around with some pages, and then went straight to AfD and RfA. Furthermore, his comments (as well as his contribs) in these areas are completely atypical of a new Wikipedia user. I know, because I spend a lot of time helping new users. Please take a closer look at this. Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 00:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I've dealt with the user in question.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for trying. Viriditas (talk)

h20 (rfa3)

did you mean to remove this? Cheers, Dlohcierekim 00:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

No, he's an established user.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Reply: Maximum the Hormone

The issue with the continual use of the standard Nihongo template is that it inserts many redundant notifications of foreign text. The initial use of Japanese text can justify the Nihongo template, however a Nihongo2 template is what should be used in subsequent instances. That template was designed with that specific purpose, and I'm certain that the manual insertion of parentheses isn't much more difficult than remembering how to execute a complete Nihongo template.. As the use of struck text, that is a simple instance of stylisation in a song title. It is the same as TITLING SONGS IN ALL CAPS, or ~Using~Tildes~ everywhere, as opposed to the simple hyphen (-). The striking of kanji in particular makes them difficult to see, especially in a standard browser font size, thus disturbing the purpose of including the kanji. Striking out this text is just irrational fancruft, important to a minute fraction of the bands sphere of influence. If you have a well supported rebuttal, or would like an outside opinion, please contact me again. I will revert the changes again in due time if nothing occurs. Regards. --Jacob ^Talk 23:37, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Fancruft? That is how the official text is written. And the tildes generally refer to the use of a subtitle, which is done in parentheses or a colon in English songs. And for the use of Template:Nihongo, you only do that to each initial use of that particular name in the text. I've never seen it used in the context you state, which is only once, and then just Template:Nihongo2 for each subsequent piece of Japanese text, which may be different from the initial one. I've removed the struck-out text, however the templates should be kept as is.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

In the excerpt you've provided to Using Japanese in the article body in the MOS-JP, you share only the first paragraph (I am unsure whether this was intentional or unintentional, but I will not jump to conclusions). If one reads further down, the section says

"Japanese text should be marked with the {{Nihongo}} or {{Nihongo2}} templates."

I think that is justification enough to use the Nihongo2 template at stylistic discretion. I'm sure this could be argued endlessly, but when it comes down to it, there is a strong push against redundancy on Wikipedia in my experience. The policy really ought to be more clearly written, as I don't think it is ever beneficial for a policy to be ambiguous. --Jacob ^Talk 07:11, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Still, several of the titles are not named the same as their transliterated names. Using {{nihongo2}} is the same as using {{lang|ja|}}. As the names are often transliterated, I'm not sure what could be the use of just using {{nihongo2}}. Either way, I tried to make the article in line with WP:MOS-JP from what I read.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, the majority of the songs are included in the album pages, where it would maybe be more appropriate to give detailed information on "single" titles. The perfect transliterations are almost an overload of information in the artist page, though. Having a multiple line title (even on a widescreen monitor) to discern between the three alternate writings of "Houchou Hasami..." is potentially confusing to me at first glance. If there was a nice way to avoid such a messy looking structure, that would be the best option, but if the Ni2 template could be used with a line break in there, it could display as something like this.

• "Hōchō Hasami Cutter Knife Dosu Kiri/Rei Rei Rei Rei Rei Rei Rei Rei Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma" (25 November 2004)
  (包丁・ハサミ・カッター・ナイフ・ドス・キリ／霊霊霊霊霊霊霊霊魔魔魔魔魔魔魔魔 Hōchō Hasami Kattā Naifu Dosu Kiri/Rei Rei Rei... Ma Ma Ma...)

The only other problem with the regular Ni-template is just the superfluous notifiers (^?), even when the Ni2 template can be used in a slightly different manor to rid the page of such nuisances. --Jacob ^Talk 07:30, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

However, aren't several of the singles not the name of the song? Like "Zawa...etc"? It's easier to have one template to include all of the content that we want to include (and br tags can be used in the middle or before).

• "Hōchō Hasami Cutter Knife Dosu Kiri/Rei Rei Rei Rei Rei Rei Rei Rei Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma" (25 November 2004)
  (包丁・ハサミ・カッター・ナイフ・ドス・キリ／霊霊霊霊霊霊霊霊魔魔魔魔魔魔魔魔, Hōchō Hasami Kattā Naifu Dosu Kiri/Rei Rei Rei... Ma Ma Ma...)

So, it doesn't really matter with the question mark, as it shows the variousaspects of reading the template.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Cannabis Corpse article

Hello. I would very much like to make a wikipedia-worthy page for this band, but it has been deleted several times and I am not allowed to make the page. I am asking the favor of allowing me to create this page. Furthermore, I am curious to know exactly why the page has been deleted, twice specifically by you. The deletion log said that it was for being unimportant/insignificant, which is simply untrue of this band. They have a large following and are very good at what they do, and, as I fell, are more than deserving of a wiki where people can go to look up their band info in one spot. Should you allow this page to be made, please contact me so that I can carry it out. Thanks for your time.

Gienappa (talk) 00:31, 4 June 2008 (UTC)gienappa

If you have reliable sources (not the band's website) that the band is notable per Wikipedia's policies on the inclusion of musical artists, then the article can exist on Wikipedia. Otherwise, Wikipedia is not the place for every garage band that performs at local bars or events.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Tomica Hero Rescue Force: Eiji Ishiguro

I am just going to give u a link to a pic I found of him in the rescue force armor (even though it is only a toy at what looks like a toyfare or something). http://www.thai-toku.com/cgi-bin/Y1Gold/tcsyabb/index.pl?board=general&action=display&num=1212497795

P.S.: I have a bunch of pics of Kamen Rider Rei and Kiva Emperor Form if you want them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tahu90 (talk • contribs) 00:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

There's gonna be an R5, yes, but we can't tell who it is yet. And anything about Emperor/Impaler/whatever form cannot be added as they have not featured the character in anything but toy catalogs. I'm aware what they look like. They just can't be added to Wikipedia until we get more textual confirmation.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

You can tell perfectly who it is going to be because of the color on their civilian uniforms his is black!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tahu90 (talk • contribs) 01:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

That would be original research. Just because his uniform is black doesn't mean someone else can't be R5. He probably will be, but we can't say this without something to back it up put forth by the production company as promotional material in a magazine.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk Page

Thanks for the edit. Made a mistake with the code and forgot to edit it. Have removed it from my page. J.T Pearson (talk) 07:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure you'll be able to fix it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Ryulong/YGOPTL

Would you consider protecting these pages from creation rather than using a cascading protection? (I can help if you like.) This page has too many expensive parser functions (see Wikipedia:Template limits). Stifle (talk) 11:19, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

If someone would like to go through this, then they can.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers

For pretty much the entire cast of MMPR you deleted some important backing information such as some cool stuff like birthdays and in depth information about the character and claimed "no trivia". My question is why? Plenty of other articles have trivia sections why can't these articles have them? I see no problem in it. For now I'll take it upon myself to put back the "trivia" or as it is listed "Backround Info" or "Quotes". I realize and respect your awards, one of them for keeping the MMPR article clean and I give you the utmost respect for it. However, your recent edits take away enjoyable depth to the characters and make the article a bit bland. Please rethink and then make a decision. Also contact me to further discuss this if need be. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TapOut 013 (talk • contribs) 05:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Trivia sections are discouraged because they become lengthy lists of useless content. There should be no reason to keep any sort of trivia in an encyclopedic article. This is why I removed such sections from several articles. The "enjoyable depth" is not what an encyclopedia is necessarily for. The content that is encyclopedic should be enjoyable. Not the 10kb of trivia. Please read WP:TRIVIA.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:33, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I read the message you sent me. I'm sorry I wasn't aware of the rule. I just really feel good contributing to articles and I kinda felt bad when I noticed a small chunk of it was done away with. Again, despite the rules I disagree with the point of view. It's not like it is completely unecessary. However, you are right and I have to accept the rules. Thank you for making me aware.

P.S. I can't remember specifics but I remember I've seen a few trivia or misc. sections for certain movies or video games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TapOut 013 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, those pages should be fixed.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Trivia

Sure thing, have just done so. Happy editing! Metagraph 05:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

User:SexySeaClownfish

Please could you undelete their userpage and usersubpages that you deleted with the rationale of "WP:NOTMYSPACE". Reasons derived from WP:NOT are specifically given as a non-criteria for speedy deletion and I think taking the pages to MFD would have been more appropriate. Regards, Guest9999 (talk) 05:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

These were done in the ideal of if the rules get in your way, ignore them. This user has been treating Wikipedia improperly. Having a user page means you're going to be contributing to the encyclopedia. I removed his non-encyclopedic contributions so he may focus on his actual encyclopedic contributions. Just because something is not listed on WP:SPEEDY doesn't mean the deletion cannot be done.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:46, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I take your point but the user is only imitating and taking part in what many other users already do, encouraged by the fact that established users seem by default to be allowed to create secret pages, humorous "cabals" and other "social content" that is not aimed towards building the encyclopaedia. If it were really accepted that these pages were harmful to the wiki then no one would be allowed to have them; established users aren't allowed to vandalise or attack people just because they've made positive contributions to other areas of the encyclopaedia. I think that seeing how the process of a deletion discussion works and having the arguments for deletion clearly presented would be a better way to encourage them to take part in building the encyclopaedia and show them why their current contribution is inappropriate (or else gently indicate that this might not be what the're looking for). A unilateral decision forced upon them seems more likely to scare them away. Guest9999 (talk) 06:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Dude, deleting subpages is one thing, but deleting USERPAGES?! Are ytou TRYING to drive him away? Just block him! You don't have to go deleting userpages! Blocking is enough. Just think twice before you do anything, man. You did not have to do any of this buulshit. Later >:-( SAVIOR_SELF.777 06:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

If he had more than 50 edits in the article space, then I would have left it. If he's driven away because he doesn't have a pretty user page and a ton of MySpacey subpages, then he really doesn't have the right mindset for Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. My deletions cut this user's contributions in half, but there are still much more edits outside of the article space.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:37, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Even if it did help contribution wise, I still find it disruptive. He's retired before and he may retire again after what you did. Not everybody's a perfect editor! People learn from their mistakes, so, why don't you fix YOUR mistake! Block him, don't delete him! >:-O SAVIOR_SELF.777 06:46, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

To be fair if he actually wants to contribute to the encyclopaedia blocking him's going to prevent that whilst deleting his userpage is not. Guest9999 (talk) 07:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but still. I mean, don't you think it was, I dunno, a little much? Sure, blocking will prevent from editing, but....you know what, forget it. I'm done here. Just put back at least his userpage. SAVIOR_SELF.777 07:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes I disagreed with the decision to delete the pages, especially without warning, but the idea that someone's on-wiki identity can be so tied to their user page that having it deleted would be deemed a "bigger deal" than being blocked is making me start to rethink my position. I have offered to help the user if he wants it and looking at his talk pages he has at least two adopters so hopefully he'll start to help build the encyclopaedia and the situation will resolve itself. Guest9999 (talk) 07:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

The beatings will continue until morale improves! In all reality, blocking him is not the answer. The deletions will get him to change his ways more than "You're blocked until you realize what you did was wrong."—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, he's retired. "Due to the actions of Ryulong". I think you did a good thing deleting his myspacey userpage, but ir drove him to quit. No comment. I mean, he blames you. Not that that's a bad thing. It's good to have one less Myspacey editor, but I made contact with him. Shapiros10 WuzHere  15:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually, he's been indef. blocked as a sockpuppet of User:I'm On Base. iMatthew _T.C. 21:42, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of entire criticism section i put in

Why did you remove the whole thing? Couldn't you have helped me with sourcing, improving it..etc instead of erasing it?Invisible Noise (talk) 21:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Sourcing is the responsibility of the content adder, not the content remover.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Yea it was a bit much. (Ur not a Prick)

U made it sound as though I'm using wikipedia as some dreadful myspace. In reality I only research one topic at a time right now. That brings me to the point u made about my adoption, when I say I need to be adopted I mean I have no clue of how to do more than watch the RC pages or add information to already created pages. So let's just say we're both too vague with our statements, call it even, and not send me anything on how to make a page because I wont. Apologizing--Neoonyxalchemist (talk) 05:14, 9 June 2008 (UTC)