User talk:AlexanderLD: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
AlexanderLD (talk | contribs) ←Blanked the page |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Wiki French == |
|||
Hiya! Names in french are generally the same as their english counterparts in pronounciation and spelling. The only differences are john = jean, william = guilliame, and jack = jacques, to my knowledge. I'm not sure if that's how the last two are spelled in french, but i'm pretty sure. If you need help with the language, i'd be glad to help you out. <span style="border:1px solid #330000;padding:2px;background-color:#C0C0C0;color:#000000;">'''[[User:RingtailedFox|RingtailedFox]] • [[User_talk:RingtailedFox|Talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/RingtailedFox|Contribs]]'''</span> 04:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Wario Land: The Shake Dimension == |
|||
Please do not move the article to Wario Land: Shake It!, as the original title, Wario Land: The Shake Dimension, is also appropriate. If you think that Wario Land: Shake It! is a better title, please discuss it on the talk page. - [[User:A Link to the Past|A Link to the Past]] [[User talk:A Link to the Past|(talk)]] 20:30, 25 June 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==Proposed deletion of [[Zelda Wii 2]]== |
|||
[[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|48px|]] |
|||
A [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion]] template has been added to the article [[Zelda Wii 2]], suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion|criteria for inclusion]], and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "[[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not|What Wikipedia is not]]" and [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|Wikipedia's deletion policy]]). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the <code>{{tl|dated prod}}</code> notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on [[Talk:Zelda Wii 2|its talk page]]. |
|||
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the [[WP:PROD|proposed deletion process]], the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion criteria]] or it can be sent to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|Articles for Deletion]], where it may be deleted if [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] to delete is reached.<!-- Template:PRODWarning --> [[User:MuZemike|MuZemike]] ([[User talk:MuZemike|talk]]) 21:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==Speedy deletion of [[:Professor Layton: The First Movie]]== |
|||
[[Image:Ambox warning_pn.svg|48px|left]] A tag has been placed on [[:Professor Layton: The First Movie]] requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under [[WP:CSD#A7|section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion]], because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the [[WP:CSD#Articles|criteria for speedy deletion]], such articles may be deleted at any time. Please [[Wikipedia:Notability|see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable]], as well as our subject-specific [[Wikipedia:Notability (web)|notability guideline for web content]]. |
|||
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding <code>{{tl|hangon}}</code> to '''the top of [[:Professor Layton: The First Movie|the page that has been nominated for deletion]]''' (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on '''[[ Talk:Professor Layton: The First Movie|the talk page]]''' explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for ''speedy'' deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact [[:Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles|one of these admins]] to request that they [[Wikipedia:Userfication#Userfication_of_deleted_content|userfy]] the page or have a copy emailed to you. <!-- Template:Db-web-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> <font color="maroon">[[User:Letsdrinktea|Lets]]</font><font color="olive">[[User talk:Letsdrinktea|drink]]</font><font color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/Letsdrinktea|Tea]]</font> 16:57, 7 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==Re: Layton Movie== |
|||
Sorry, but sources have to be '''independent''' and [[WP:RS|reliable]]. The fact that a website ''exists'' is no evidence of either. The site http://nbof.org.uk ''exists'' but I'd be the first to say it's completely unreliable (mainly because my mates and I wrote it). A film needs to meet the criteria at [[WP:MOVIE]] to be counted [[WP:N|notable]] and generally needs to exist in the first place (Wikipedia generally doesn't pre-announce; see [[WP:BALL]] about this). [[User:Tonywalton|Tonywalton]] <sup>[[User talk:Tonywalton|Talk]]</sup> 21:27, 7 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Further - the article as written said nothing about who Layton may be - articles need to make it clear what they are talking about (a simple mention of "Professor Layton" may be someone's high school English teacher). Having looked around a bit I see that it refers to [[Professor Layton#Feature_film]]. If you can flesh ''that'' out at all, with [[WP:RS|reliable]] sources please feel free. I've redirected your Layton movie page to the Professor Layton (series) article as at the moment it wouldn't contain enough to warrant having its own article. [[User:Tonywalton|Tonywalton]] <sup>[[User talk:Tonywalton|Talk]]</sup> 21:43, 7 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Agreed - [[Professor Layton]] meets all the criteria for notability. However ''your original article'' made no reference to this at all - it assumed the reader knew all about it. The article needs to make it clear what it is talking about. Let's say an article is about Maurice Micklewhite. Who the heck is Maurice Micklewhite? It turns out that that is the birthname of [[Michael Caine]]. An article needs to establish what it's about very quickly. So an article needs to say something like |
|||
:'''Professor Layton: The First Movie''' is a movie based on the [[Professor Layton (series)|Professor Layton]] video game series (and so on) |
|||
Then it's clear what's being talked about - remember thousands, even millions, of people can read these articles who do not have your knowledge of a subject so it's important to explain what you mean at the very start. |
|||
I've redirected your "the first movie" page - there isn't really enough for a separate article for the movie at the moment so any information will go well in the main Layton article - once the movie becomes [[WP:MOVIE|notable]] on its own it can go in its own article. Thanks for your patience [[User:Tonywalton|Tonywalton]] <sup>[[User talk:Tonywalton|Talk]]</sup> 00:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
I'm glad you're content. I now hate you, as you have introduced me to [[Professor Layton (series)|Layton]] and I think I want to play Professor Layton; as I haven't a DS I want a version of this I can run on my MacBook ☺ Damn, damn. |
|||
Seriously, thanks for your contribution and please do carry on keeping things up-to-date but do remember that '''context''' is very important - you may have knowledge of something but remember some guy in [[Somalia]], or on the end of a broadband line in [[Yorkshire]], doesn't necessarily understand. Cheers [[User:Tonywalton|Tonywalton]] <sup>[[User talk:Tonywalton|Talk]]</sup> 01:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==Discussion on navbox ordering== |
|||
I've started a discussion [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Navbox ordering|here]] regarding the issues surrounding your reversion of my edits to the articles on the games of the [[Professor Layton]] series. I assure you they were not intended as [[WP:VAND|vandalism]]. Regards, [[User:Guest9999|Guest9999]] ([[User talk:Guest9999|talk]]) 15:57, 27 August 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:I only changed the navboxes once before starting the discussion at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Navbox ordering|here]]. They have since been reverted by another user. Listing the games chronologically would mean listing them by there real world release date, not the fictional chronology of the series. [[Wikipedia:Writing about fiction]] advises that fictional material should be presented in its real world context - not from an in-universe perspective. As far as I can tell all other game series navboxes list games in release order even when there are prequels in the series (examples: [[Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater]] in [[:Template:Metal Gear]], [[Silent Hill: Origins]] in [[:Template:Silent Hill]], [[Grand Theft Auto: Vice City]] in [[:Template:Grand Theft Auto]], [[Resident Evil Zero]] in [[:Template:Resident Evil series]].). In the Star Wars template the newer films are in a separate second titled "prequel trilogy", which clarifies their real world context, a solution which wouldn't really be practical in this case. Consider other film prequels such as [[Tremors 4: The Legend Begins]], [[X-Men Origins: Wolverine]] and [[Psycho IV: The Beginning]] - all listed in release order in their respective templates. [[User:Guest9999|Guest9999]] ([[User talk:Guest9999|talk]]) 16:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== August 2009 == |
|||
<div style="background-color:#F9F9F9; border:1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;"> [[File:Information.svg|20px|left]] Hello. Please don't forget to provide an [[Help:Edit summary|edit summary]]. Thanks, and happy editing. <!-- Template:Editsummary --></div> [[User:Megata Sanshiro|Megata Sanshiro]] ([[User talk:Megata Sanshiro|talk]]) 00:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC) |
|||
[[File:Nuvola apps important.svg|25px]] You currently appear to be engaged in an '''[[WP:Edit war|edit war]]'''{{#if:|  according to the reverts you have made on [[:{{{1}}}]]}}. Note that the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]] prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]]. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|discuss controversial changes]] to work towards wording and content that gains a [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]], and in some cases it may be appropriate to request [[WP:PP|page protection]]. Please stop the disruption, otherwise '''you may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing'''. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> [[User:Megata Sanshiro|Megata Sanshiro]] ([[User talk:Megata Sanshiro|talk]]) 16:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== August 2010 == |
|||
[[Image:Information.png|25px]] Welcome to Wikipedia. The <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template%3aProfessor_Layton?diff=380258011 recent edit]</span> you made to [[:Template:Professor Layton]] has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]] for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative [[Help:Edit summary|edit summary]]. You may also wish to read the [[Wikipedia:Introduction|introduction to editing]]. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-huggledelete1 --> — '''<font class="texhtml">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff]] [[User:Jeff G./talk|G. ツ]]</font>''' 03:03, 22 August 2010 (UTC) |
|||
[[Image:Information.png|25px]] The <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professor_Layton_and_the_Curious_Village?diff=376529120 recent edit]</span> you made to [[:Professor Layton and the Curious Village]] constitutes [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]], and has been reverted. Please do not continue to remove content from articles without explanation. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-huggledelete2 --> — '''<font class="texhtml">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff]] [[User:Jeff G./talk|G. ツ]]</font>''' 18:25, 22 August 2010 (UTC) |
|||
==License tagging for File:Unwound Future Boxart.jpg== |
|||
Thanks for uploading [[:File:Unwound Future Boxart.jpg]]. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags|image copyright tags]] to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/All|this list]], click on [[:File:Unwound Future Boxart.jpg|this link]], then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. |
|||
For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions]]. Thank you for your cooperation. --[[User:ImageTaggingBot|ImageTaggingBot]] ([[User talk:ImageTaggingBot|talk]]) 19:05, 22 August 2010 (UTC) |
|||
==File copyright problem with File:Mansion.jpg== |
|||
[[File:Copyright-problem.svg|64px|left]] |
|||
Thank you for uploading [[:File:Mansion.jpg]]. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes [[Wikipedia:Copyrights|copyright]] very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the '''license''' and the '''source''' of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a '''[[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags|copyright tag]]''' to the [[Help:Image page|image description page]]. |
|||
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [{{fullurl:Special:Log|type=upload&user=AlexanderLD}} your upload log]. |
|||
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thanks again for your cooperation.<!-- Template:Di-no license-notice --> [[User:Sfan00 IMG|Sfan00 IMG]] ([[User talk:Sfan00 IMG|talk]]) 21:29, 22 August 2010 (UTC) |
|||
==File copyright problem with File:Mansion.jpg== |
|||
[[File:Copyright-problem.svg|64px|left]] |
|||
Thank you for uploading [[:File:Mansion.jpg]]. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes [[Wikipedia:Copyrights|copyright]] very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the '''license''' and the '''source''' of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a '''[[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags|copyright tag]]''' to the [[Help:Image page|image description page]]. |
|||
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [{{fullurl:Special:Log|type=upload&user=AlexanderLD}} your upload log]. |
|||
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thanks again for your cooperation.<!-- Template:Di-no license-notice --> [[User:Sfan00 IMG|Sfan00 IMG]] ([[User talk:Sfan00 IMG|talk]]) 22:41, 26 August 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== Re: Professor Layton Vandalism == |
|||
I've left a message on the user's talk page. - [[User:New Age Retro Hippie|The New Age Retro Hippie]] [[User talk:New Age Retro Hippie|used Ruler!]] [[Special:Contributions/New Age Retro Hippie|Now, he can figure out the length of things easily.]] 00:36, 13 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:Thank you for that. I left you a comment by accident, because I was going to post a message there myself but then my browser got all messed up with two edits at once or something. Thanks again [[User:AlexanderLD|AlexanderLD]] ([[User talk:AlexanderLD#top|talk]]) 00:38, 13 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::Two things, however - a block cannot happen. The edits are neither malicious, nor are they constant. If the edits continue at a disruptive state, the user may then be blocked. Also, the editor's edits are not vandalism. Vandalism implies edits that are made for the sole purpose of disrupting or otherwise damaging Wikipedia, which is likely not the intent of this user. - [[User:New Age Retro Hippie|The New Age Retro Hippie]] [[User talk:New Age Retro Hippie|used Ruler!]] [[Special:Contributions/New Age Retro Hippie|Now, he can figure out the length of things easily.]] 00:40, 13 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::Well, at the present it isnt vandalism, but after continously ignoring the discussion page about the topic, and having his edits reverted over and over. If he progresses, it will definately become vandalism! But yes, at the present it isnt that bad, I just dont want it to progress. [[User:AlexanderLD|AlexanderLD]] ([[User talk:AlexanderLD#top|talk]]) 00:43, 13 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== Professor Layton characters == |
|||
Again, Professor Layton articles are neither featured nor are they considered good articles. Just because they do something and are related to this article does not mean that this article must do the same thing. The characters ARE important to the game, and as such, are mentioned in the plot. A character list is only necessary to delve deeper into the characters. Delving deeper is only necessary when there's more to say than the description of the plot. Why do we need a list of characters? If they are all important, then they should all be mentioned in the plot section. If not, then they needn't be mentioned in the article. - [[User:New Age Retro Hippie|The New Age Retro Hippie]] [[User talk:New Age Retro Hippie|used Ruler!]] [[Special:Contributions/New Age Retro Hippie|Now, he can figure out the length of things easily.]] 19:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:Well, they are very important in the plot, they reason they are not mentioned is probably because nobody has ever written a complete plot of the game. All that is written is the prologue. The rest of the characters play a crucial role in the plot, and should be mentioned within the article. [[User:AlexanderLD|AlexanderLD]] ([[User talk:AlexanderLD#top|talk]]) 20:31, 13 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::The plot is too long for just a prologue. Using [[Chrono Trigger]], a game renowned for its complex and interesting plot as an example, we see that the prologue alone for Layton is about as long as CT's entire plot, minus setting and characters. - [[User:New Age Retro Hippie|The New Age Retro Hippie]] [[User talk:New Age Retro Hippie|used Ruler!]] [[Special:Contributions/New Age Retro Hippie|Now, he can figure out the length of things easily.]] 21:05, 13 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::Well, the other three Professor Layton games all have a detailed plot. I dont think its fair to remove content from one article, and not the others. It doenst really dimish the quality of the article, so I see no reason for anything to be removed. [[User:AlexanderLD|AlexanderLD]] ([[User talk:AlexanderLD#top|talk]]) 21:09, 13 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::::Then the characters should be removed from all those articles, too. The only important characters in the series are those who recur in it. The fact of the matter is that we must look at what people will say if this is nominated for a good article - the first thing people will wonder is why a character list is necessary. If you look at GAs/FAs, you will find few that do this. - [[User:New Age Retro Hippie|The New Age Retro Hippie]] [[User talk:New Age Retro Hippie|used Ruler!]] [[Special:Contributions/New Age Retro Hippie|Now, he can figure out the length of things easily.]] 21:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Well, the characters listed play a role in that game, thats why they are only listed on the article for the one game they are in. I would understand your point if I had included someone like Dimitri Allen in an article for Curious Village, but mentioning Tony Alanbard in Specter's Flute is extremely relevant. Because the characters are not mentioned in the plot, yet play a crucial role in the plot, they should be mentioned in the article. [[User:AlexanderLD|AlexanderLD]] ([[User talk:AlexanderLD#top|talk]]) 21:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Again, it's a matter of whether they need to be mentioned in the plot or not. If they are central to the plot, write the plot section to include them. If not, then why should we list them? - [[User:New Age Retro Hippie|The New Age Retro Hippie]] [[User talk:New Age Retro Hippie|used Ruler!]] [[Special:Contributions/New Age Retro Hippie|Now, he can figure out the length of things easily.]] 05:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Well, considering I dont speak much Japanese, I dont feel comfortable writing information I know isnt 100% accurate. For the time being, the main characters should remain on the page. [[User:AlexanderLD|AlexanderLD]] ([[User talk:AlexanderLD#top|talk]]) 19:30, 15 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::We shouldn't include content that we know will be removed inevitably. We are expected to keep it in a certain shape, where when it DOES come out in English, we won't have to do much to make the transition. - [[User:New Age Retro Hippie|The New Age Retro Hippie]] [[User talk:New Age Retro Hippie|used Ruler!]] [[Special:Contributions/New Age Retro Hippie|Now, he can figure out the length of things easily.]] 08:43, 16 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::Well articles about upcoming movies, games, and books all go through a massive revision after the product is released. Some information remains, while some of the information is removed. Considering the game is not out yet, and neither you nor me can write an accurate plot description, I would think that the character list is the most logical way to describe the plot, but just for now. [[User:AlexanderLD|AlexanderLD]] ([[User talk:AlexanderLD#top|talk]]) 12:16, 16 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|Proposed deletion]] of [[Professor Layton and the Wandering Castle]] == |
|||
[[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|link=|48px|]] |
|||
The article [[Professor Layton and the Wandering Castle]] has been [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed for deletion]]  because of the following concern: |
|||
:'''A search for references failed to find significant coverage in [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] to comply with [[WP:N|notability]] requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links: <br /><span class="plainlinks">[http://www.google.com/search?&as_eq=wikipedia&as_epq=Professor+Layton+and+the+Wandering+Castle Professor Layton and the Wandering Castle]</span> – <span class="plainlinks">[http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&btnmeta_news_search=1&q=Professor+Layton+and+the+Wandering+Castle news], [http://books.google.com/books?&as_brr=0&as_pub=-icon&as_epq=Professor+Layton+and+the+Wandering+Castle books], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Professor+Layton+and+the+Wandering+Castle%22 scholar]</span><br /> Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient [[WP:N|notability]].''' |
|||
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be [[WP:DEL#REASON|deleted for any of several reasons]]. |
|||
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your [[Help:edit summary|edit summary]] or on [[Talk:Professor Layton and the Wandering Castle|the article's talk page]]. |
|||
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion process]], but other [[Wikipedia:deletion process|deletion process]]es exist. In particular, the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion]] process can result in deletion without discussion, and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|articles for deletion]] allows discussion to reach [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> [[User:Hammerbrodude|Hammerbrodude]] ([[User talk:Hammerbrodude|talk]]) 19:54, 12 November 2011 (UTC)<br> |
|||
:Hey. I'm sorry about this; Layton's my favorite series, and that this must be done brings me a sort of pain. However, the books are not notable at this time... no reliable source covers them, and the two articles are comparatively empty; any key details could probably be relocated to ''[[Professor Layton]]'' or ''[[List of Professor Layton media]]'', with the latter being the page that the third, already-long-deleted book, ''Professor Layton and the Illusory Forest'', was essentially merged with. If the novels ever receive notable coverage, I'd love for them to be added back in... but at the moment, they're more or less a page that will never escape stub-class. And since I'm trying to improve all of the other Layton articles (currently, Last Specter), it stands out as a bit of a hazy spot in the series' coverage. Naturally, this proposal extends to... |
|||
== [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|Proposed deletion]] of [[Professor Layton and the Phantom Deity]] == |
|||
[[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|link=|48px|]] |
|||
The article [[Professor Layton and the Phantom Deity]] has been [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed for deletion]]  because of the following concern: |
|||
:'''A search for references failed to find significant coverage in [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] to comply with [[WP:N|notability]] requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links: <br /><span class="plainlinks">[http://www.google.com/search?&as_eq=wikipedia&as_epq=Professor+Layton+and+the+Phantom+Deity Professor Layton and the Phantom Deity]</span> – <span class="plainlinks">[http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&btnmeta_news_search=1&q=Professor+Layton+and+the+Phantom+Deity news], [http://books.google.com/books?&as_brr=0&as_pub=-icon&as_epq=Professor+Layton+and+the+Phantom+Deity books], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Professor+Layton+and+the+Phantom+Deity%22 scholar]</span><br /> Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient [[WP:N|notability]].''' |
|||
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be [[WP:DEL#REASON|deleted for any of several reasons]]. |
|||
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your [[Help:edit summary|edit summary]] or on [[Talk:Professor Layton and the Phantom Deity|the article's talk page]]. |
|||
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion process]], but other [[Wikipedia:deletion process|deletion process]]es exist. In particular, the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion]] process can result in deletion without discussion, and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|articles for deletion]] allows discussion to reach [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> [[User:Hammerbrodude|Hammerbrodude]] ([[User talk:Hammerbrodude|talk]]) 19:54, 12 November 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== List of Hannibal episodes == |
|||
Hi, I just wanted to ask if I may have offended you? I rudely retorted to your incorrect edit with "Check again", not even taking under consideration that you may be impaired or disabled in someway. Incapable of discerning the number of episodes and their corresponding airdates for the third season. There is a repeat that will be airing on July 2, 2015, which is where you may be getting confused. I hope this clears things up :). Thanks and cheers, [[User:LLArrow|LLArrow]] ([[User talk:LLArrow|talk]]) 22:21, 25 April 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Hi, no I wasn't offended until you wrote this comment. You're suggesting I have a disability because I disagreed with you over the validity of that source. I don't even know what website that is but I don't find it more reputable than IMDB or the production company DeLaurentiis Co's Twitter that said just today that the finale with be on 27 August. I haven't seen anything from NBC or anyone else involved with the show stating that there will be a repeat on 2 July; so I don't see how one site with no source reporting a repeat episode is considered more trustworthy than the show's producers. There's no need to insult someone over the date of a TV show, it isn't that important. I don't know why you're so defensive and need to suggest I must have a mental handicap because I disagreed with you. Anyway, it's fine, its just a TV show. Let's both enjoy the episode whenever it airs! Best [[User:AlexanderLD|AlexanderLD]] ([[User talk:AlexanderLD#top|talk]]) 23:56, 25 April 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::Funny how the best of intentions can be twisted into something heinous. I really was worried that I may have offended someone that may not be mentally or physically altogether. After all the error is quite barefaced. ''[[The Futon Critic]]'' is the most respected and widely accepted source for television episode air dates on Wikipedia, and has been for as long as I can remember. Check any other TV series episode table, and 9 times out of 10, ''Futon'' will be cited. I looked into your claim made by the De Laurentiis Company on Twitter; and it turns out that they were even [https://twitter.com/DeLaurentiisCo/status/592062481649963009| in the wrong]. IMDb is considered one of the worst reliable sources around, spewing out loads of malarkey on a constant basis. Production companies are commonly left out of the loop as far as network air dates are concerned. I trust that you'll be amenable to my explanations, for I meant no wrongdoing and only wish to incite in the most efficient of ways. Goodday, [[User:LLArrow|LLArrow]] ([[User talk:LLArrow|talk]]) 00:18, 26 April 2015 (UTC) |
|||