User talk:Pagrashtak: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 19:32, 4 March 2009

Archives

Looking for a Nintendo Power article

I'm looking for a Nintendo Power article. Would you happen to have this specific article on New Super Mario Bros.: Thomason, Steve. "Sizing Up Mario". Nintendo Power (202): 41–42.? Gary King (talk) 20:20, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're not going to believe this—I moved earlier this year, and when I was collecting my magazines, I couldn't find that one. I'm only missing about six issues of the entire NP run, and that happens to be one of them. Sorry. Pagrashtak 16:05, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edge - LoZ:OoT

The bulk of the details (publisher, location etc.) are the same, but the important bits are: Issue 66 (Christmas 1998), Pages 84 to 87. If you need anything specific from it leave me a message. - X201 (talk) 17:11, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use

Will you have time to add some references or external links that can be used to show WP:N has been met? --Ronz (talk) 00:45, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I'm not going to have time to put a lot of effort into this article, no. I've added a referenced sentence for one of the key reasons I believe ICH to be notable—several countries have adopted their guidelines as law. If that is enough to convince you that the ICH is notable, please remove the notability tag, or at least switch it to importance. Pagrashtak 16:22, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. Thanks for the help! --Ronz (talk) 17:23, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility

Thanks. Just to be clear, does alt text just apply to Images or other things as well? Bovineboy2008 (talk) 17:41, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Videogame templates

I've been meaning to re-sort the articles and delete the templates, but the project is relatively inactive over the hols (as Real Life calls) so I figured no one was in a rush. I'll get round to it. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself) 18:24, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Taking a look, CITESHORT is meant for reverences to books/magazines/etc. For web site references, a normal cite template should still be used. As for the other one, the video game template has a line for captions so adding a second caption is redundant. TJ Spyke 20:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at Wikipedia:Alternative text for images#When alternative text is unnecessary. Alt text isn't needed here since it would add nothing that the caption doesn't. As for the ref, maybe the Cite speech could be used. There's nothing wrong with using the cite web template though. Either way, a short cite shouldn't be used. TJ Spyke 20:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about using a ref more than once one the same page? That's easy. <ref name="refname"/>, with the ref name obviously going in the refname spot. TJ Spyke 21:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guess. TJ Spyke 21:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stub templates

Thanks, I had no idea. MrKIA11 (talk) 21:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Three-pronged test for Elements of Fiction

I have drafted a revsion to WP:FICT that may address some of your concerns. I would be grateful for your views at WT:FICT#Three-pronged test for Elements of Fiction. --Gavin Collins (talk) 00:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Twilight_Princess#The_Soundtrack

Could you take a look at the discussion? In it, I refer to an edit you made in which unreferenced information was added. If possible, please conjure up a reference. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 06:41, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only dumb questions are those unaksed.

Hey quick question: What are B and C articles? I hears discussion about changing the rating system when I left, but what exactly constitutes these new ratings (AA?)?--CM (talk) 14:41, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, there was too big of a gap between Start and B, so C-Class was added to provide a better transition. I could try to tell you what it is, but WP:ASSESS will do a better job. Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Assessment has VG-specific criteria for B and C as well. Pagrashtak 14:44, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah thanks. So, basically a more cutthroat world for GAs and A articles. Anything else new around here?--CM (talk) 14:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but don't know if I'm staying. Maybe semi-retired, we'll see how it goes. I wasn't here for good topics, but I'm assuming they were made as consolation prize now that FT's are more difficult.--CM (talk) 15:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I might clean up RTW if I have time. I don't know if you have ever left, but my basic wiki-coding skills have gone down the crapper. It's like trying to speak a different language after a long time of not using it. Quite frustrating.--CM (talk) 15:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I double replied. But as to GTs, I suppose I concur with you. It's hard with articles to go right to featured, so I don't suppose FTs would be any easier without some mid-point goals.--CM (talk) 15:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Soul Calibur Major character pages

Hi. Ever since the majority of the Soul Calibur Characters pages were deleted and merged there has been a huge user backlash. You are probably a very busy person, so in case you've missed any discussion, heres a link to what im talking about:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_characters_in_the_Soul_series

The problem here is blatant double standards as to what comprises notability. Some Soul Calibur character have thier own pages, some dont. This is illogical as they're all well known characters in a major long running video game series. Lets be honest, that list is a disgrace, unreadable, unorganised, and unwarrented in the first place. In mine and many others opinions it is in the best interests of the vast majority of people seeking information on these characters that they all have thier own comprehensive, organised pages.

I hope you can back me on this one. Dont worry, I will insert more refferences in the near future, just please allow me some more time. Thanks in Advance, Devilsaur2.

PS: When I said "they're all well known characters in a major long running video game series", I was of course exclusively reffering to the major characters, a list for the minor characters is fine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devilsaur2 (talk • contribs) 03:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages

! in response to your revert. Artichoker^[talk] 03:35, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Momo (Xenosaga)

So I don't get accused of trying to cause disruption, I'd like to revert Momo's page as I believe there is a good chance I can get her article to be much better including the key part on reception since I know reviewers commented on the changes to her model.じんない 05:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My advice in this type of situation is to expand the character's entry in the list. Once it's built up to a sufficient level with out-of-universe information we can split it off. Pagrashtak 15:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NM anyway. i'm doing it on my own namespace till i have enough that it should pass an AfD without too much trouble.じんない 15:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After reading Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Character merges, I just wanted to pop in a quick note of cheer and support as someone who frequently goes through the same thing with the Anime/manga project after we do character merges. I totally understand your frustration here (and certain inappropriate and false attacks by another editor certainly didn't help). I hope the Video Game project will continue to help support you in upholding valid merges. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 18:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC) has bought you a pint! Sharing a pint is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a pint, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Cheers![reply]

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{subst:WikiPint}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

You like Tomb Raider?

Me too! Listen, I want to get TR2 to GA, so I made a sandbox. Help would nice, but you don't have to. I'm just letting you know, because you seem to be the main contributor. Simon^KSK 00:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the link: User:SimonKSK/TombRaider2 Simon^KSK 00:27, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure where this is coming from—as far I as know I've never edited Tomb Raider II. If I were you I'd just work on the existing article, I don't think you really need a sandbox. Pagrashtak 02:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thegeebe2 and reverting

No I'm not trying to delete my subpage, sorry. I'm new to editing, and i was testing the different commands on twinkle. Thegeebe2 (talk) 20:29, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I put that user's article up for deletion, I thought it should have been at first, but then reverted it. I'll take that off that users page. And sorry about all this crap... I'm still getting used to editing. Sorry. Thegeebe2 (talk) 20:37, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greyhawk characters

Hey there,

Because ClueBot's not going to let me do it... [1] I had unmerged several of the Greyhawk characters, not because I felt they necessarily needed their own articles, but because I wanted to expand some of the entries and you were much faster at merging than I was at expanding. I have no prejudice whatsoever about merging any or all of them back into the list, and won't unmerge any in future unless I plan to expand again (which I have no current or forseeable plan to do so, but you never know about the future). 71.194.32.252 (talk) 15:54, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, since you're fine with merging them back I have done so. If you want to expand anything, I'd suggest doing so directly in the list, but be careful with the content—in-universe details are probably the last thing these entries need right now. Pagrashtak 15:32, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FA push for ALttP

I'm thinking of working on ALttP to push it to the FA. I suggest merging the BS Zelda game into it to expand it, and add development information of it and ALttP/FS that may exist, and drastically boosting the Reception section - there's gotta be a lot more reception for it than that. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 08:34, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Thanks for your support in my RfA, which closed with 83 ayes to the right, one no to left and five abstaining users!
Sabre (talk) 21:01, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

A Nobody^{My talk} has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Notability (Fiction)

There seems to be some progress being made towards redrafting the guideline. Most of the arguments for a permissive guideline seem to have been countered in the sense that they have been found not to be viable. My attempts to obtain a compromise earlier this year seem to be leading towards a slightly stricter applciation of WP:V for fiction that should discourage topics which are only the subject of in universe plot summary, trivia and cruft. A recent post at WT:FICT#The rules seems to make this clear. Can you provide some cool and clear support towards drafting a compromise that is compliant with existing Wikipedia policies and guidelines? --Gavin Collins (talk) 19:32, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 125: / Line 125: @@
 [[User:A Nobody|A Nobody]]<sup>''[[User talk:A Nobody|My talk]]''</sup> has smiled at you! Smiles promote [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!  <br /> <small>''Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.''</small>
 </div><!-- Template:smile -->
+== Notability (Fiction) ==
+There seems to be some progress being made towards redrafting the guideline. Most of the arguments for a permissive guideline seem to have been countered in the sense that they have been found not to be viable. My attempts to obtain a compromise earlier this year seem to be leading towards a slightly stricter applciation of [[WP:V]] for fiction that should discourage topics which are only the subject of in universe plot summary, trivia and cruft. A recent post at [[WT:FICT#The rules]] seems to make this clear. Can you provide some cool and clear support towards drafting a compromise that is compliant with existing Wikipedia policies and guidelines? --[[User:Gavin.collins|Gavin Collins]] ([[User talk:Gavin.collins|talk]]) 19:32, 4 March 2009 (UTC)