User talk:Jake Fuersturm

Going inactive. I've spent far too much time here over the past while, and the process has become, quite simply, frustrating. Therefore I've decided to take a break from Wikipedia. I may pop up on occasion for a visit. Take care! (If you need to get hold of me for some reason, just send me an email). -- Jake Fuersturm

Welcome to Wikipedia

Welcome!

Hello, Jake Fuersturm, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Blehfu (talk) 22:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Jake fuersturm (talk) 04:38, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Cast lists

The specific part of MOS:TV that you need to refer to is Wikipedia:Manual of Style (television)#Cast information which says "main" cast status is determined by the series producers, not by popularity or screen time. Furthermore, articles should reflect the entire history of a series, and as such actors remain on the list even after their departure from the series. Peter Cambor is still included because this reflects the entire history of the series. It's appropriate to note that he is now a recurring character but not to move him from the main cast list. This is a discussion that has been had on numerous pages, including Talk:NCIS: Los Angeles and the out come is always the same because it represents community consensus. If you disagree with the consensus, please feel free to discuss on the article's talk page, or at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (television). --AussieLegend (talk) 17:28, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not disagreeing that Peter Cambor should remain on the cast list but the point that "and as such actors remain on the list even after their departure from the series" is ambiguous, as it does not specify whether they should remain on the overall list, or on the main cast list in particular. Jake fuersturm (talk) 17:36, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Original research

Speculative content such as this constitutes original research and is not permitted in articles. Everything added must be verifiable and attributable to a reliable source. There is more at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. --AussieLegend (talk) 21:49, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I've cut it out. Jake fuersturm (talk) 16:06, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

List of SGU characters

Your work to improve that article is noticed and appreciated. Thanks for helping out. Jclemens (talk) 07:33, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Jake fuersturm (talk) 07:42, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject G.I. Joe!

Hello, thank you for joining WikiProject G.I. Joe, and for your recent edits on G.I. Joe-related pages! Great stuff! I'm glad you're here and I look forward to working with you.  : ) Thanks, --Cerebellum (talk) 00:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey, thanks, and I'm looking forward to helping out. I'll do what I can, although 99.9% of my old comics and toys are in buried in a crate somewhere in my parent's basement :P Jake fuersturm (talk) 00:50, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

ARAH toy lists

Wow, you are doing some awesome work! I think you're definitely on the right track, and the draft for the list of playsets is looking good - I feel like a separate article is warranted since things like the Terrordrome don't fit neatly into the vehicles list, and a single article might get too long anyway.

As for the FLAGG and the others you mentioned, that's really your call - be bold and someone will be quick to let you know if you mess up. ; ) It might not even hurt to include them in both lists. Moving to the ARAH title for the list of vehicles is a good idea, considering the other toylines that have had vehicles. Anything with "an hero" in the title is on the pagemove blacklist because of some internet meme, so you'll have to get an admin to perform the move for you. I really don't know about the tabular format - it looks good and it can be helpful, but if you want to go more in-depth (like with the stuff merged from ROCC), it can be difficult. Again, it's really your call - you seem to have great judgement with this stuff and I trust you!

I also liked your suggestion about the service branches on the character list, I may try and do that myself sometime this weekend. Thank you so much! --Cerebellum (talk) 13:56, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, cool, thanks. Didn't realise that about the Hero meme. How do I flag down an admin? -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 15:35, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

A while ago when I needed a move performed, I just posted at MediaWiki talk:Titleblacklist, and the response was pretty quick. I guess you could also post on the talkpage of someone from the Wikipedia:List of administrators. --Cerebellum (talk) 15:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm also going to restore Conquest X-30 and H.I.S.S. as redirects, so you can merge them as well if you like. BOZ (talk) 16:03, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Cool, thanks, that would be helpful. I noticed that H.I.S.S. had been deleted at some point, and I had no idea how to recover the info. -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 16:05, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

While we're at it, I just noticed that you've got Admin rights. Any chance you could help me out with a page move: List of G.I. Joe vehicles -> List of G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero vehicles? It was blocked when I tried to do it this morning. I've currently got it tagged as a requested move here. Thanks! -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 16:35, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey, sorry I didn't get to your page move. Looks like the admin who closed the AFDs on Conquest and HISS had a real problem with me restoring them as redirects (first time I've seen that), and re-deleted them, so to avoid what they call a "wheel war", I won't restore them again. If you go to WP:DRV, and state your intentions to merge the content, I'm sure another admin will re-restore them without hesitation. Or, you could approach the admin who deleted them in the first place and see what he says to the idea. BOZ (talk) 05:42, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

S'OK, that's cool. I was able to get to the Conquest and HISS articles before they got re-deleted and merged the content. And I was able to get someone else to do the page move, so no worries. Thanks again! -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 05:47, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I took this one to the other admin; it's my understanding that edit histories are not supposed to be deleted once an article's content is merged, and when he closed the HISS AFD he even said that a merge would be OK. Maybe he just didn't notice that you had merged the content. BOZ (talk) 06:11, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Miami Medical Glenn McCoy Hosea Chanchez Stealing Christmas Leonard Freeman Three Wise Guys Super 8 (film) Love Bites (TV series) David Dayan Fisher Ice Queen (JAG) Thomas A. Betro Amber Riley David Brant Gravity (TV series) Linsey Godfrey National Criminal Intelligence Service Kojak (2005 TV series) Better with You Beyond Reality (TV series)

Cleanup List of Australian television ratings for 2009 List of television shows set in Washington, D.C. The Beast Below Merge Security agency List of Happy Tree Friends TV episodes Starfleet uniforms Add Sources Caitlin Todd Barrett Foa Heavy Duty (G.I. Joe) Wikify DTV (Moldovan TV channel) Conquest (board game) Integrated Single Specialty Provider Expand Scarlett (G.I. Joe) Ugly Americans (TV series) Dilshad Vadsaria

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:26, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

"Also, you're aware that membership in a sub cat doesn't autopop the parent?"

Hi Jake. If by autopop you mean "automatically populate", then yes I was aware. But the LGBT category, in practice, isn't used to hold every L, G, B or T character except where they're included in subcategories; the characters added straight to 'LGBT' rather than gay, bi or lesbian are usually ambiguous examples (such as Santana prior to Falchuk's statement, or Stewie Griffin).~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 16:28, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

That's fair. I was just of the mind that someone searching out examples through a higher-level category would find it easier to locate characters that way, without having to drill further down. But if it's more appropriate to only include one or the other category, then I would agree with you that the bi classification is the correct one for Brittany. Does the Manual of Style have anything to say on this? (P.S. Sorry, I try not to use abbreviations like that, but I couldn't spell everything out and still fit it all into the edit summary) -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 16:40, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

WP:SUBCAT leaves it flexible to accommodate the requirements of the category itself, which is smart. (Wikipedia:Categorization/Gender, race and sexuality is discussed in terms of Living Persons.) I assume, though, that LGBT characters would qualify as "partially diffused", which is what I said above: characters of more certain sexualities are 'diffused' to the sub-pages, and characters of less certain sexualities remain in the 'main' category. It's neater that way.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 17:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:NCIS-LA - LL Cool J as Sam Hanna - CBS Website.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:NCIS-LA - LL Cool J as Sam Hanna - CBS Website.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. AussieLegend (talk) 11:53, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

So what's "fair"? Jake fuersturm (talk) 14:04, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Flint Dille

LOL! No, not really.  ;) I just brought his article back from the dead after finding decent sources, so I was re-linking everything.  :) BOZ (talk) 20:38, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Peer review Narnia

Thanks for the review. I replied to your suggestions if you don't mind. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:05, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Like I said before, it's more a set of observations rather than a formal peer review. If you're amenable, I can try to do a bit of re-writing myself, but I hesitate to do that because you obviously know the source material at a much greater level of expertise than I do, and I don't want to mess anything up by mistake. I guess the point I'm trying to get across is that the article should be accessible to a generalist audience, for example someone who's recently stumbled upon the Lewisverse and hasn't read beyond the first novel but wants to learn more. I'll take a look at your replies. -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 20:37, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I did a bunch of stuff to the article. Check it out when you get a chance. -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 17:51, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Doing good so far. Keep it up. :) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 19:52, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Your turn .... :P

Or, we could do a trade, if you'd feel inclined to review Wikipedia:Peer review/G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero (Marvel Comics)/archive1 -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 20:00, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I have been busy with other projects. If you want me to withdraw for now I give you permission to say the nominator has withdrew. And to be honest (or modest) I don't think I would be any good at reviewing a article. I will read the article though and see what I think about it. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 19:55, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Alrighty, as discussed, closed the peer review. BTW, thanks for the Barnstar :) -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 22:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Your welcome. I am going to suggest an common peer reviewer to review the article. Fingers crossed. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 23:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure. I'm still working on a few things, but should be done by tomorrow. Also suggest that we ask for a copy edit. -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 23:19, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I know a few other editors who are a good peer reviewers so I haven't gave up requesting yet. :) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 15:35, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:Novels

Welcome to WikiProject Novels, we don't have very many active contributer right now in the group, so we could always use some more help. We have several backlogs that are in need of work, first and foremost we have our Assessment backlog which can always use some more help (make sure you check categories and formatting while you are assessing). Also, we have a a long list of articles with cleanup tags that can always use some more work. We held two collaboration earlier in the year, which can be found at Wikipedia:Novels/Collaboration and we may hold another in the coming months. Make sure that you add the collaborations page, the assessment page and the project talk page to your watchlist and we can see if anything comes up. If you need any help, feel free to ask, and I am more than willing to help on any project of yours. Happy editing! Sadads (talk) 10:37, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome! Will do what I can, but a little pre-occupied with Narnia right now =) Cheers. -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 02:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: TOC left at Chronicles of Narnia

Well, in my opinion, the whitespace below the infobox isn't that big of a deal, as the section header draws the eye back to the text well. Which is my issue with the text sandwich. The narrow(er) column of text is harder to read than the left aligned version, and forcing the lead text to the center makes the actual article start at an unusual place; having the actual article text start at the top left is a better starting spot for the article. At least that's the way I see it. YMMV, but I just think it looks better. oknazevad (talk) 02:22, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

That's fair. Just wondering. Thanks. -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 02:24, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

PR request

Sorry, I don't. Reviewers seem to be in perpetual short supply. For copyediting, you can try WP:GOCE/REQ, and there's a short list of reviewers at WP:PRV. Good luck. Finetooth (talk) 16:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

The Chronicles of Narnia copy edit

Hi, just to let you know that the copy edit is now complete. All feedback welcome. Best, ► Philg88 ◄ ^talk 23:30, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey, thanks very much for your efforts. I know that article can't have been an easy one to edit. Cheers! -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 00:01, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

The Chronicles of Narnia

Wow, nice work on The Chronicles of Narnia page. It's been a long time since that page has seen that kind of action. LloydSommerer (talk) 01:13, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey thanks, appreciate that. Article still needs a bit of tweaking - I suspect the Adaptations section is going to be problematic - but it should be good to go back into the Peer Review queue soon. Any input you have is welcomed. Cheers. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 01:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

RE: So what's up?

I don't hat G.I. Joe, I don't even know it outside of a reference to it made in Family Guy. I'm just opposd to any series that has over 200 articles about its characters, and, y'know how it is, if you don't challenge an article's place in Wikipedia there's no one who properly defends it. Harry Blue5 (talk) 12:06, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

And have you been following the ongoing discussions re: the article cleanup? Obviously not. Perhaps you should visit Wikipedia talk:WikiProject G.I. Joe sometime. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 14:19, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually, yes I have. No need for the italics, dude.Harry Blue5 (talk) 15:34, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Well then you'd know that the Wikiproject members are working on it. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 15:37, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it seems that all Raintheone and Harry Blue5 want to do, is concentrate on disputing sources, instead of helping to find alternate ones. And now that all the G.I. Joe articles have been assessed, they are opposing the notability of them, by removing information and then expecting someone else to clean up the mess. Case in point the Zartan article, which has been marked for deletion, and hopefully will be given the chance to to improve, in much the same way that you have improved the G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero (Marvel Comics) article. Fortdj33 (talk) 20:40, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that. I just called Raintheone on it, over in your discussion on the Duke talk page. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 20:43, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Just a pointer.

I have seen what's been going on the G.I. Joe article and I just want to say be careful when it comes to youtube video links per WP:Youtube. ;) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 14:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Aye, thanks :) -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 14:48, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

In response to the comment in Narnia talk page

I am a new member of the G.I. Joe WikiProject so I noticed the problems But it's been not hit as bad as the Transformers articles. At least five AFD's a day used to happen with them. And they were normally successful at that. The comics project uses the same problematic formula sometimes but they haven't been hit hard yet. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:00, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

That's probably a fair comment, although to be fair you have more guys involved too :) Between Chronicles and the Joe comics article, I'm really tired :P -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 20:04, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

G.I. Joe articles are not so bad. You should see Spidey related articles. Every article but his and Spider-Man in film are awful in Wikipedia standards. If you don't mind and when you are free you can join in my half alive work group and help otut with that. You can help by navigating the template and maybe doing some cleanup. These kind of articles are special because there are the first kind of articles I participated in. So it would be nice for them to look better. I am also thinking of peer reviewing Spider-Man because I kind of want a FA push on that article someday. :)Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:50, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

G.I. Joe PR

I looked over the article again and made a few more comments on the talk page. Glad my review was helpful, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:50, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for dropping by. We've been scratching our heads too, on adding more supporting refs. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 02:55, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

GI Joe

If you want to talk about it, not in the AFD.. ;) Besides the only time I mention your edits were directly related to the GI Joe articles. I also noticed you removed articles you worked on, because you fear that people are picking them off. Whoever it was can still look at your page history. :p Hows the GI Joe editing going and What is next on the agenda. =)Rain the 1 ^BAM 19:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

It's true that I removed them, and while I realise that what I (or anyone) do will never be a secret due to edit histories, I'm sure as hell not going to make life easy for them. And it's not a fear, it's real enough - there was another AfD discussion (I'm not 100% sure, but I don't recall you being involved in that one), and shortly afterwards one of the guys I was disagreeing with started tagging articles that I'd worked on, that he hadn't touched before, and which were totally unrelated to the "universe" in question. As for discussing G.I. Joe, I'm just curious as to why you seem to have such a bee in your bonnet about it, when there's a lot more (and a lot worse) out there - is it because G.I. Joe is low hanging fruit (in the sense that there are so few people working on it, and fewer "fanboys" to disagree with you) as compared to, say, the Star Wars universe? -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 19:49, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I've never bothered with any before if I am honest. I'd quite like to see GI Joe Rise of The Cobra, Channing Tatum is haawt! Anyway, I just think they could be better. The articles have a dedicated team in place and I thought a push in the right direction and the project could drive out some great stuff. I used to get confused about using fansites when I first joined, I got nudged in the right direction and found alternatives. That is mean though.. that some people choose to pick on your work as a whole. Really pointless too, like that would help your editing at all... I guess trying to look through the Star Wars articles would be a little time consuming on top of this, and being a regular editor to 3 soap operas and watching over another 2.Rain the 1 ^BAM 20:00, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, the Joe project is a bit hampered by lack of manpower - we're engaged manpower, but we're a very small number and between RL and other wiki-interests, that doesn't leave a massive amount of time to devote to it. We could probably get more work done if we weren't fighting off AfDs, and when we're forced into a push to polish an article due to AfDs like yours popping up, then diverting our attention is a disservice to both us and to other articles that deserve our attention our as well. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 20:06, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

There are some good discussions popping up now too. The editor suggesting alternatives to Yojoe is really good I think. I'll change a few things If i notice any mistakes and the like. Obviously I cannot change any storyline in comic or cartoon sections because I have not the slightest. It is helping putting a few tags in places so willing editors might notice and finally change them. Some of the articles have been tagged since 2008, oh dear, I thought..Rain the 1 ^BAM 20:23, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Agree that putting correct tags on articles is helpful, but AfD isn't really - in fact it's probably counter-productive. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 13:28, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

The name did not have any spaces in the title, it is the front cover anyway? Not page 1.Rain the 1 ^BAM 12:58, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

NO, it's the first page. Since when have you seen the cover of a comic book that: 1) shows the title of the issue, doesn't show the title of the comic book series, and shows the detailed credits? -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 13:05, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Should of explained it more then in the rationale. Anyway, I thought this was nice. [1] Dunno if it is included anywhere, here is the [2] start of the competition. I'm just looking at what there is in 1991.Rain the 1 ^BAM 13:12, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

You mean in the Description field where it clearly states: "The title page of G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero #21 (cover date March 1984)"? -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 13:16, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Have you noticed the rationale is really thin in each box and fails to explain the use in the article. Besides .. "Title page", I'm a Brit you know. Why not just put page 1 in the text.Rain the 1 ^BAM 13:21, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I dunno, it makes perfect sense to me. And as for Brits - you mean in the same way that the "first floor" is actually the second floor, rather than the ground? -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 13:27, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Something like that, different words mean different things. That even applies for words meaning different things in different parts of the UK.Rain the 1 ^BAM 13:33, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The links are interesting, but not sure where to integrate that. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 13:47, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Maybe on the main article for the GI Joe universe, there might be some more notable searches and competitions like it - may even warrant a new section if there is enough. I feel the comic article will article will fail FAC. They will certainly ask you to remove anything sourced with fansites and remove non free images, all of them. They do not allow one anymore. In the article I tried to remove claims cited by a fansite, they could just make information up or misquote. You tend to question everything too.. like the image name, everyone would favour my trivial change, I changed it from mashed together text to a normal title. The fair use rationales on the images are really thing too. There is so much room to elaborate on why it is used, normally that would be brought up in GA. In a way I have been really accomodating, but you don't seem to want to find the middle ground..Rain the 1 ^BAM 14:08, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

So you're saying that I should accept everything that you say at face value? That may be how wikipedia works (unfortunately), but not how it works in real life. Or is it just that you don't like being challenged? -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 14:13, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

As for whether this article will pass FAC - if you're really trying to be helpful, there are several alternatives to deleting an entire chunk of text outright:

1. Help find an alternate source to back up the claim
2. Delete the reference, but keep the claim, and let the claim be challenged independently -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 14:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

There may not be one if it was an exclusive interview. One this issue yes, because they will kick it out of FA straight away if there is way too many issues. I don't mind you challenging me, but bare in mind I am trying to help, but if someonen uninvolved notices the issues at FAC they will take it back to GAR. I'm not telling you off btw, so can forget that for now, yeah?. Anyway I always said you could find info on the net for the "pre net era" but I didn't look really. I found another link to suggest they hosted annual searches, 1987 - [3]. Then some of the results - [4] .. I like the fact it was the best selling toy, along with a nice quote - [5]. [6] ... [7] - This one is some criticism of the toyline.Rain the 1 ^BAM 14:50, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The Chronicles of Narnia

Good catch; thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:36, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - when you consider how many hours I spent editing that article in the week before that, it would have been sad if I hadn't noticed it :) -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 01:54, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Raintheone

If you and the Wikiproject G.I. Joe members are having an ongoing dispute with another user, my recommendation - if discussion seems unlikely to resolve the dispute - would be to look into Wikipedia's dispute resolution system. There are options such as formal mediation if you think regular discussion will not get the job done, or if you feel the problem is more seriously behavioral in nature, there are the options of wikiquette alerts, or a user request for comment. I recommend discussing this with other users such as Fortdj33 (and if he comes back, Cerebellum), and perhaps Mathewignash who has had a lot of experience dealing with this sort of attention on Transformers articles. BOZ (talk) 14:09, 12 April 2011 (UTC)