User talk:TTN/Archive 12

Archives
June 2006 to September 2006 September 2006 to January 2007 January 2007 to April 2007 April 2007 to May 2007 May 2007 to June 2007 June 2007 June 2007 to July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 to October 2007 November 2007 to January 2008 January 2008 to March 2008

Welcome back!

Thought you left for good after that last arbitration case. Everything ok? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 01:12, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

• To reiterate the above sentiment, a hearty welcome back. May the good work continue. Eusebeus (talk) 03:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

• Darn, I thought you'd finally left for good. ;_; Keep on trucking, guy. 24.227.222.45 (talk) 04:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Good to see you active again. -- Ned Scott 04:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back. – sgeureka ^t•c 06:57, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. TTN (talk) 23:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Some good news

Pixelface left. I had reported him to AIV for editwarring on WP:NOT and he left when he got blocked for 12 hours. Sceptre ^(talk) 23:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I guess that's pretty good. It will certainly be relieving not having to sit through his constant WP:WAX arguments. TTN (talk) 23:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

He hadn't been using WAX as much, really. Just lawyering for the removal of PLOT. Which was reverted by several users, including Masem. Sceptre ^(talk) 00:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I still have things to catch up on then. How's the whole thing going anyways? I've tried going over a few talk pages, but it's like staring at an orgy of words; very awkward and hard to understand. TTN (talk) 00:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

FICT is being relaxed a bit, but the substance is the same; it just asks that people try to improve before asking for merges. People are also asking for spinout articles where content can't be legitimately merged (example, The Unicorn and the Wasp right now), and consensus is leaning towards silencing FICT on that matter, allowing over policies (PLOT, SPINOUT) to cover them. Sceptre ^(talk) 00:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Also FICT still has a section for spinouts, so I guess in a way it melds together. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I hope you weren't offended by my gallows humor that I left on your talk page, I was peeved that you seemed to have left because of the nonsense at arbcom. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 06:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Just a reminder, it was decided that you are to be restricted from editing articles regarding tv show and video game articles for six months. I'm just saying, be cautious about what you do here. On a side note, what happened to you? Why were you MIA for so long? ZeroGiga (contact) 04:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Read it again, it says tv shows or characters, not video games, he can edit those if he wants. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:12, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd also note that he can contribute to or initiate any discussion on the talk pages as well. Who actually enacts cleanup is secondary to establishing problem articles, especially given the debate at the Fiction guideline. Eusebeus (talk) 22:10, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

He can actually edit these articles directly. "TNN is prohibited for six months from making any edit to an article or project page related to a television episode or character that substantially amounts to a merge, redirect, deletion, or request for any of the preceding, to be interpreted broadly." As long as the edit is unrelated to merging/redirection/deletion, he can still edit. -- Ned Scott 22:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I looked at your trimming and tweaked it a bit. As another note, when you do trimming 1. Only remove movie information if there is a consensus to do so - Keep the movie information on Death Note unless you get consensus on a talk page that it should be removed. I want the movie info to stay, and the movie characters are mentioned too. I'll ask about the Chris Britton thing, but I'll likely leave that one out. Now, when dealing with refs make sure that you don't break any of them - Preview the page and scroll down to the refs page to see if anything is missing. Also, contractions are too casual; try to spell out words in full. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:15, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the film I started a talk page section Talk:List_of_Death_Note_characters#Film_information WhisperToMe (talk) 21:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Why did you come back?

• I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but Wikipedia was moving rather smoothly without all the controversial and wanton content removal. - 4.156.54.55 (talk) 02:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
• See Special:Contributions/TTN. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

• Can you clarify what you mean by linking to his contribution history - especially since onlookers won't be able to understand your comment after any significant length of time? Returning editors are a good thing, but you'll have to pardon me if I don't celebrate the return of someone whose enormous dedication to getting his way by force was one of the greater factors pushing us towards a fall to complete anarchy. --Kizor 12:00, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

TTN I put in your talk page that your absence was because you were suspened, (see archive) and when you got rid of it you said and I quote, "my absence had nothing to do with that." So why were you away for so long?Fairfieldfencer FFF 17:46, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

House of 1000 Corpses

Obviously since I'm very busy with College I'm not going to be able to do extensive work on the articles. I said when my load lightens up I'll attempt to renovate them.--CyberGhostface (talk) 16:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, look. Here's what I'll do. I'm going to ask around for help since I'm busy myself, and if they don't improve, I'll redirect them and fix them at a later time. Does that sound fair?--CyberGhostface (talk) 16:56, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I'm redirecting the articles for now.--CyberGhostface (talk) 00:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

An honest opinion?

Seeing as I know you're the most critical about episode articles: how do this article look: The Fires of Pompeii? Sceptre ^(talk) 21:55, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

It seems pretty decent from a glance. Other than just regular pruning and tweaking that needs to be done, too much weight seems to be given to the individual reviews. I would trim those and try to find some more variation if possible. If none can be found, maybe just try to kill a paragraph from the reception. TTN (talk) 22:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking about that, to be honest. I think it's a good thing-a point that came up in an episode FA was that the reception section didn't reflect the critics' analysis enough. Sadly, ITV aired several premieres on the same night, so the reviewers went for that. Sceptre ^(talk) 22:09, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Darkstalkers Characters

I don't think you might be interested in doing such at the moment, but may I suggest that we try to merge certain Darkstalkers Characters. Even though you did add a notability tag, I believe that they don't possibly have sufficient Real World Information to stand alone, with the exception of Morrigan, Lilith, and maybe Dimitri. (And incase you were wondering, this is not an attempt to piss you off.) ZeroGiga (contact) 21:52, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm unable to suggest merging or redirect the articles, which is why I'm using the tags for now. If you want to get everything set up, I'd be fine with getting the list all set up. TTN (talk) 14:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

And thank goodness you're prohibited from suggesting the merge/redirection of articles. 209.195.102.143 (talk) 18:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Super transformation

Despite the tag's removal, I think there are way too many pics. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't affect the article in any negative way, so your effort should be put into other things that actually matter? - 4.156.54.134 (talk) 20:42, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks but I'd like an answer from TTN. No offense. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, there really should be one sample picture and that should be it. Articles aren't meant to be galleries. If you feel like it, you should try to get the article split up into the main series article and the individual characters. I'm sure the images would be fine in those and it would take care of that pointless list. TTN (talk) 19:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Well I have asked a question at WT:C but none have replied, so I might do something. On another note, have you seen the recent activity at List of Earthlings in Dragon Ball? Characters who fail WP:NN are being added at a rapid speed. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, when an article is redirected (like Android (Dragon Ball)) what becomes of its talk page? Is it common practice to tag it for deletion or just redirect it? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:41, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Never mind. Seems that "Android (Dragon Ball)" is being kept. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 00:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I've given up on the Dragon Ball articles until those project members are ready to actually condense the multitude of unneeded articles. It's just a lost cause until then. TTN (talk) 20:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Sephiroth BCR has recently joined WP:WPDB. He'll definitely support a merger, we're in the process of getting rid of the saga pages. Join in on the discussion. I'm sure we'll get back to the lists eventually. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:45, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Warning

Regarding you recent activity in tagging articles for Notability, please see your ArbCom restriction, which interpreted broadly applies to this type of editing activity. You may want to consider to refrain from initiating notability disputes on these articles. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Going from no merging to no cleanup tags seems like a pretty large jump, even if the restriction is interpreted broadly. I really fail to see how tagging a category every once and a while would even fall close (the first group was just to get started). Unless you're personally going to enforce your warning, I'm going to continue with the tags (again, I won't be tagging hundreds at a time or anything) until multiple people are against it or something. TTN (talk) 19:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Question about Super transformation

Sounds like a merger proposal, TTN (referring to the above discussion). If such a merger were to occur, would it make sense to put a paragraph about the transformation (well sourced, of course) into Chaos Emeralds? They're articles that are very closely linked, but I'd rather not do it if it's not practical. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 22:31, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

That article should be merged to the main series article as well in its current state. Unless creation and reception information can be found on the topic, it has no reason to exist. Even then, the various character articles can hold the specific entries and the main series article already has a section on it anyways. At most, you would just want a section linking to that section in the series article. TTN (talk) 20:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Well that's your opinion. Just because it's not made the way YOU want it, that doesn't mean it has no reason to exist. That type of ethic is uncivil in of itself. Although you do have a point, it does require some clean-up, but not to the point where it should be outright obliterated. ZeroGiga (Contact) 15:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I really don't understand you. Anyways, how is it just my opinion? The article lacks creation and reception, and it is unlikely to ever gain anything of actual substance. Everything, including the current WP:FICT discussion, agrees with that. Remove all of the current fluff, and you have a good list entry. Now, if it gains creation and reception, then it'll be fine. TTN (talk) 21:59, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's kind of why I want to tie in a brief "summary" paragraph about it into Chaos Emeralds, not the whole article. I believe that when I can start sourcing the article, these two elements are critically connected in terms of creation. I have no plans to copy the whole article and merge it into Chaos Emeralds, just a brief paragraph. I wanted to know if it would be practical to do this in addition to merging it into main character articles. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 16:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that'd be fine. I really just suggest that you work on getting the series article up to par instead of a lost cause, though. TTN (talk) 16:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright. Just to tell you, TTN, I proposed a merge of merging Super Transformation with Chaos Emeralds. You can join the conversation and comment about it if you want to. That's one of the things you are allowed to do, correct? --- ZeroGiga (Contact) (My Contributions) 14:57, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Greetings From Bali

Hi. Best wishes. While you may have missed the drama, I'm back. Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 13:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

It's good to have you back. Hopefully, I can kill some of the drama on my side as well. TTN (talk) 13:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Terima kasih (Bahasa Indonesia for Thank you). Seen Wikipedia:Ignore all dramas? Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 13:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey you guys may kick out of this :D. While I believe the issue has been raised before, do you plan on doing anything about the other accounts "you" have i.e. Wikiquote? « ₣M₣ » 13:57, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I've usurped most of my impersonators on the usual wikis. I'm not going to worry too much about ones like ml:User:Jack Merridew. TTN, you may find this interesting. Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 14:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

You think they would at least do slightly better if they were trying to impersonate me. Do you think that you could point out that the Wikiquote one needs to be blocked? TTN (talk) 14:22, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

done; see q:User talk:Poetlister#User:TTN - a 'crat there. see also Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 14:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

• The others are already blocked. If you wish to usurp those accounts, I can guide you through it. Been there, done that, got the receipt pinned to the wall over the bed. Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 14:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

  see also; m:User:Jack Merridew/Matrix and m:User talk:Jack Merridew/Matrix. Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 14:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

  I've never really had any sort of interest in any of the sibling projects. Thanks for the offer, though. TTN (talk) 14:38, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

  I have accounts on most of them and will keep an eye out for impersonators of you on them; it would be useful if you made a post here that explicitly stated you've created none of these. You may wish to create preemptively create accounts on projects you may have interest in later. I found it quite interesting to branch out to the others. Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 14:45, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Your userpage

Hi. I've requested protection because it gets a helluva lot of vandalism - if the request gets declined, you can always request it yourself. Sceptre ^(talk) 00:04, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Want to Carry On Exercising Wikipedia?

Hey there, TTN. It looks like the Pokémon articles on Wikipedia are still being merged or deleted even without your help. Perhaps you were the catalyst that started all this, but nonetheless...
When all the restrictions imposed on you expire, go ahead and continue slimming articles down, as it is now apparent that they will eventually be merged or deleted without you manning the controls. You're just following the policies which USF pointed me to, so I'll not intervene. Hell, I might even assist you if the situation deems fit. -- Altiris Helios Exeunt 09:41, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I can still trim articles. I just can't be the one to suggest or carry out a merger. TTN (talk) 16:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Indefinite Wikibreak

Hey. Incase you're interested, I'm taking an indefinite Wikibreak. I wish you the best of luck on your restrictions, and I hope this site becomes more encyclopedia when I come back. Oh, and I reverted the Nakoruru article back to the redirected state. See ya! ZeroGiga (talk) 06:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Pokemon Red and Blue regarding glitches

Not after to start rubbish or anything, but you might re-add the seafoam/cinnibar island information regarding capturing other pokemon there in some fashion with the MissingNo./M-Block (which is what Nintendo's help line called the other glitch character) as that glitch is the reason MissingNo. appears in the first place. It should be pretty simple to find a citable source, and relates a little to the game's handling. Item duplication has been related in many guides, including magazines, as a related point to MissingNo.'s whole appearance, making it the only reason mention of the glitch appeared in bulk. That should be citable too...Tips & Tricks in the letter section, Nintendo Power, and several game guides I know of have mentioned all three. But like I said, they're more important to show a fundamental about the gameplay that they fixed when Yellow was released.

Your call there. If you want help with getting citations for that, give me a shout and I'll dig through my stuff.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 22:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

It's more about weight than references. If you can provide decent sources only to provide more context to what's there, fine. Otherwise, there is no need to bother adding unnecessary details. TTN (talk) 16:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

List of Jericho characters

Hi.Can you help with some trimming in the List of Jericho characters? -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll look over it. TTN (talk) 11:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks already better. Keep going. I'll make short changes after that. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:28, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't touch "Emily Sullivan" yet. There is a discussion for that character in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emily Sullivan. We can trim after discussion is over. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Ben Kuchera

Interesting bit, but regarding him solely being a "random blogger" as you stated, the fellow was interviewed for NPR's Weekend Edition. Now I'm not an expert, but that does put him above "random blogger" status as a source, no?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe in cases where his personal opinion is being cited, but it doesn't really make a ten second vanity clip on American Idol any more relevant. TTN (talk) 16:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

It's more his reaction in regards to that clip. The clip itself is relative more to Jigglypuff's song, which amongst various versions is one of the character's trademarks. Additionally the guy is a source for the opinion that in Brawl the character is a joke character, or more or less difficult to win with.

By the way, I don't know if you've been keeping track, but did turn up two journals that cited the character, one in the context of gender definition on a psychological front and another on the character's context regarding infusing a love for drama in children...though I can't access the full bulk of that journal just yet...Either way, you can agree that these would help constitute a larger reception section no? (Also, RSVP about the bit above regarding the glitches)--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

The song should be noted somewhere, but the clip is still just trivia. If they had spent five minutes on it, that would be one thing, but the small clip provides no more notability to Jigglypuff than a clip of Ievan Polkka would for the internet meme, Loituma Girl. Now, if the song had some sort of non-Nintendo commercialization, that would be another story. Books, journals, articles, and other things like that are better attributed to the overall impact of the series. Unless it's like twenty pages dedicated to Jigglypuff, there is no point in singling it out. TTN (talk) 16:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

AE thread regarding Sonic the Hedgehog characters

A thread concerning your recent posts to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games has been started at WP:AE. The AE thread is visible here. Thank you. --Pixelface (talk) 02:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

You explicitly violated your ArbCom restriction. Also, you quite obviously have skirted the edges of your restrictions in other edits.[1] here. Your last block for the purposes of arbitration enforcement was less than a month ago for a duration of one week. Taking that into consideration, you are blocked for two weeks for violating your ArbCom restrictions. After you return from your block, I strongly recommend that you tread carefully and avoid even coming close to the boundaries of your restrictions. Vassyana (talk) 06:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)