User talk:Headbomb

User	Talk	Archives	My work	Sandbox	Resources	News	Stats

Template editor

Hi, I saw that you just received the protected template editor userright. Are there any full protected templates that you'd like to edit? Let me know and I'll downgrade the protection so you can do so. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:19, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not for now no. I'm too busy to get involved on the technical side for now. Later in the year maybe. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:09, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New REFBot

There is a proposal on Wikipedia:Bot requests#New REFBot for a new REFBot working as DPL bot and BracketBot do. I beg politely for consideration. Please leave a comment if you wish. Maybe you could work on it like you did it with other projects? That would be fine. Thanks a lot in anticipation. -- Frze (talk · contribs) 10:29, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Myron Mathisson

Thanks for clearing up my mess and for all the effort you put into it. Best, M∧Ŝc²ħε И_τlk 05:59, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FA review?

Hello,

I noticed that you are very involved with the physics articles on Wikipedia, and I was wondering if you could help me out. Right now, I'm working to bring the article AdS/CFT correspondence to FA status. So far, people have had many good suggestions and many positive things to say about the article, but I'm having trouble getting people to support or oppose the nomination.

I was wondering if you'd be willing to take a look at it and tell us your thoughts at this page. Please note that you do not have to be an expert on the subject. The article has already been checked quite carefully by other reviewers, and at this point, I'm just looking for people who can check that it meets the FA criteria.

Please let me know if you're interested. Thanks. Polytope24 (talk) 15:24, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Witcher

"Used for purposes of illustration in an educational article about the entity represented by the image. The image is used as the primary means of visual identification of this article topic." This is the rational used for the image; as the enhanced edition is not the article topic, it has no valid rationale. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 03:30, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Witcher:EE is part of the Witcher topic, so yes its use is justified. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 03:35, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The rationale states that it's the primary mean which is patently untrue. Ignoring that, a second box art is not acceptable for use to describe a topic. This is indisputable. Exceptions are made in cases where the box art itself is identified - not the subject of the box art, but the actual box itself - for example, Okami, Mega Man (video game), and Ico all use a second box art but only for the purpose of showing the art, which in all three articles is discussed by reliable sources. In order for The Witcher: Enhanced Edition's box to be featured on the page, the art itself must be the subject of critical commentary or be notable on its own merits. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 03:43, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Take it to WP:VG. I'm off for the night and I won't be around for a few more days. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 03:45, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Imaging Particle Analysis

Hi! You improved this article a fair bit at a point; while you're not the original author you might still be interested in the review comments.
--Gryllida (talk) 08:27, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strangeness production

What happens if there are no interwikis, which could be put into wikidata? Should the mess remain then in Strangeness production? Hidaspal (talk) 07:26, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]