User:Deckiller/archive21

Clone Wars

The political parallel section is complete. I'll begin working on military comparisons pretty soon. — Deckill e r 21:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

We're going to need sources for the military section, and we also should really work on the Star Wars parallels and "Popular Culture" parallels. I think, after that, all that remains is a small development session that is already described in the political parallels section. — Deckill e r 17:30, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay—I'll take a look and see if I can do anything with that. It's coming along pretty nicely, though! I'm glad there wasn't a bunch of people who wanted to revert the initial rewrite. – Mipadi 17:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I also noticed you changed the dashes to commas — both are generally acceptable, so I like to mix it up to add variety. — Deckill e r 17:34, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Star Wars newsletter

Project updates
Greetings, Star Wars editors! Deckiller here. It's the first edition of the WikiProject Star Wars newsletter, and yes, it's a semi-ripoff of the Esperenza newsletter. I think it's important to begin with some good news: Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones, Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, and Jabba the Hutt have reached featured article status! Kudos to the editors who helped obtain these achievements! WikiProject Star Wars is also on a mission to improve Star Wars articles using the following ideas: An out of universe perspective versus an in universe perspective (see Wikipedia:Writing about fiction and the future ammendments to our manual of style) Evolving lists into regular articles Moving excess information and specifics to Wookieepedia (and providing links to Wookieepedia per the "see also" and/or "external links" sections) Enhanced communication amongst WikiProject members More to come These should provide the basic steps needed to improve and "encyclopedia-fy" the Star Wars series of articles.
Things to do
There are plenty of Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/things to do. An update to the page is coming very soon, and it will represent the new and exciting changes that Star Wars pages will be receiving!
Out-of-universe versus in-universe perspectives
Although details are forthcoming, I would like to take this time to explain the gist of this concept. Wikipedia has generally agreed that fictional articles should write about the topic from a "real world" perspective, focusing on real world issues and topics, with a section or two for plot synopsis and so on. Jabba the Hutt is a solid character example, and Clone Wars (Star Wars) is quickly moving toward an out of universe perspective.

Article evolution

As many of you know, lists of minor Star Wars-related themes are very common on Wikipedia; however, since these may be seen as violations of Wikipedia policy (and having seperate articles would breach even more policies), the tentative solution is to create general articles on a list's topic (for example, turning List of Star Wars devices into Technology of Star Wars, which allows us to cover everything from hyperspace to comlinks in a general encyclopedic fashion). This can be very tough for some broad topics, so the key is organization. I encourage all editors to list their ideas on the WikiProject talk page. It will be a very difficult — but tangible — effort.

For an example, let me point you to the Final Fantasy WikiProject. Some of us over at that WikiProject decided to turn various components of Final Fantasy X, such as Pyreflies, Yevon, and the backstory — into an article describing the world of Spira. Location descriptions were given a List of locations in Spira article, and the details themselves were placed on the Spira (Final Fantasy X) page. This is a decent template to follow — however, we will need to place priority on out-of-universe, "real life" topics and perspectives in realtion to the article.

Sounds confusing, eh? It won't, for examples will be popping up left and right in the near future!

Signed...

— Deckill e r 03:19, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Concept discussion

Ah, but why would we want to put all that effort into lists if they merely make things easier on deletionists by compiling all the targets into a single AFD-able page (as recent events have shown)? --maru (talk) contribs 03:58, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I meant that the lists would serve as the middle step toward being turned into actual general articles with an overview to prevent deletion. — Deckill e r 04:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Like, we had the List of Star Wars devices (which has been userfied to User:Deckiller/Star Wars devices. We can churn all that information into a Technology of Star Wars article to describe the various aspects of technology (a heading for communications for things like comlinks and whatnot). Then, we can also use this to describe the development, significance, parallels, and so on. It's like what the Final Fantasy WikiProject and the people on the fiction policy pages have been working on. — Deckill e r 04:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps I am too pessimistic, but copying FF WP seems unrealistic- such compilations seem impossibly demanding of sources and information, or shot through with OR and thus vulnerable. --maru (talk) contribs 04:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to try it out in my userspace with Mipadi and perhaps a couple others and see how it goes with a technology section before even considering moving it into the Wikipedia namespace (or advancing it outside of the proposal/trial stage). I mean, this all sounds like a grand plan, but I do agree that it will be very difficult (hence why Star Wars is handled as it currently is). Naturally, there will be links to the sub-articles of various topics (droids, blasters/lightsabers/vibroweapons, etc). — Deckill e r 04:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the wiki-anniversary greeting. :) Yeah, I suppose we did start around the same time. I was actualy looking at the Esperanza calendar and saw you were upcoming. Happy early first edit day. :) — The King of Kings 03:39 July 11 '06

You're welcome all the same. 8^) <-- I'm trying get creative with the smiles — The King of Kings 03:47 July 11 '06

Hey, thanks

Thanks for offering your opinion concerning spoilers on Jimbo's talk page. Could you also weigh in on this proposal on the spoiler warning talk page? Thanks, man. See you. Ryu Kaze 00:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Apparently I'm a little more opinionated and passionate about the matter, though, huh? XD Ryu Kaze 00:13, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Star Wars more broadly

Im currently on a long wikibreak but i got a suggestion. Like u suggested in the newsletter, why not just create 1 article about them instead. The article just describe technology in star wars versus real world. It can talk about where the concepts came from, by whom they were created, how the influenced the real world... I think we are dedicating too much space to invidividual fictional things instead star wars should be covered more broadly (we giving each vehicle, weapon a whole section or even article)... What u think? - Tutmosis 01:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, that's exactly what I was pointing out; priority on an "out of universe" perspective with a basic "in universe" description. Actually, the entire reason I started the WikiProject was to ultimately push for this. It can easily be done for technology, creatures, and so on. Check out my sub userpages from my userpage; I'm starting the project from there. — Deckill e r 01:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

SW WP newsletter

Just would like to comment on your first newsletter. Yeah, it was a great newsletter, with a bit of funny bits in the front. Thank you for the newsletter. Weirdy 03:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC).

FFVIII

Yeah, I think we could probably get it there too. Given that it's my second favorite FF (first being FFX obviously), I'd like to help get it to FA status the same as I helped get it to GA. Overall, it looks quite good, though I'd personally like to work on the Reception section a little bit more to adjust some wording and add some more information. I own the issue of EDGE magazine that reviewed this game (I actually owned it before I got the one that reviewed FFX), so I could add some more information (they totally loved it, actually; more than FFX; they gave it out a 9 out 10). I tell you what. Give me a few hours to eat and see how the war over the spoiler tags is progressing (I'd like to kick those out of the FFVIII page if that's okay with you?) and I'll look over the page. I honestly haven't been watching it too closely in the past couple of months, so I'm not sure how it's been altered. I imagine Hibana, yourself and others have been protecting it, though. It looks largely unchanged from how it was when last I looked at it, though the Reception section is different (meaning it looks better). Anyway, I'll check it out soon and we can try to do this. Ryu Kaze 16:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

We definitely should compress the Character section. Preferably before we take it to Peer Review. They'll roast us. Ryu Kaze 20:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, we're almost done here. We need to compress the Character section some more if at all possible, and we need to make sure our licensing is up-to-date on the images (I'll take care of that part). I think we can be ready for a Peer Review in another day or so provided we run into no problems with condensing the Character section. Ryu Kaze 22:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Alright, the images are all taken care of now. We just have to shorten the Character section and we should hopefully be good to go. Ryu Kaze 23:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Tyler, I've chopped the Characters section down a lot, and it looks a lot better, but I still feel like it's going to be regarded as too long. So what I'm going to do now is make a judgement call and chop off the "Other appearances" section. It's just too trivia-like, and it's probably sutff better left to character pages.

Personally, I'd rather keep the information about the GF designs, Edea's design, and Raijin and Fujin's, but I've chopped things down in such a way that if they still say it's too long, we can drop those paragraphs, retaining everything about the central characters, while still accomodating suggestions about length. We're almost ready to go. Ryu Kaze 00:51, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Alright. If we had to, I think we could also lose the part beginning "During the game's..." and ending "...early in the game." Ryu Kaze 00:55, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. It might be best to just drop that little table altogether, really. It's cool, but it kind of presents too much of the suggestion of us trying to plug the game, as though we're only trying to show off positive reviews. And the funny thing about that is that in this case, EDGE had almost nothing bad to say about it, and they're the usually the most hard-assed of video game critics. Ryu Kaze 01:42, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, but I suppose we should entertain the concept because it's normal procedure. Great job on those edits, by the way. Ryu Kaze 02:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I feel pretty good about this thing's chances. How about you? Though I think we better make sure it doesn't get any longer than it is now. We don't want to have add a third paragraph to the lead. Ryu Kaze 17:38, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Image talk for FF8

I don't know if it's happening on your screen too or not, but does the Triple Triad image overlap with "Junction system" by any chance? Also, if we use a Triple Triad image, wouldn't it be better to go with one of game in progress, like this one? By the way, if you want a battle image, how about Quezacotl versus a T-Rexaur? Ryu Kaze 02:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Good battle images. Ryu Kaze 02:38, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I can easily get rid of that ugly "IGN Vault" thing if you want one of these. Ryu Kaze 02:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting a 404 error when I click on the link. :( Ryu Kaze 02:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh. XD Thanks. Yeah, that one's pretty good. I wish we had one that was more of an "action shot," if you follow me. That one would work if we can't find anything better, and it does have some added value due to it displaying those three in military uniform, as well as one of them summoning. I wish we could get something like Squall diving in with a swing, though. And on a better boss. XD Oh well. Like I say, that one's got enough value to be just fine if there's nothing better out there. Ryu Kaze 02:54, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. Modem died. Anyway, I just think Elvoret's kind of lame to me, but the image would work well. That won't stop me from trying to find a better one, though. XD Ryu Kaze 03:19, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

By the way again, is the Triple Triad image okay to you? I've still got that overlap problem. Ryu Kaze 03:46, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I can't find anything better, so I guess we'll be going with Elvoret. I'll edit the image and include it in the morning. Ryu Kaze 03:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

FF8 - A Man in Black

Just wondering — have you had a chance to take a look at FF8 today? Ryu and myself overhauled the article, and we think it's FA-worthy. It's on peer review right now. Thanks :) — Deckill e r 06:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Looking very nice. The criticism is a bit choppy, but I guess that's unavoidable with a game so widely-loved but also widely-derided. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Dear god, that criticism section is easily the most difficult thing I have ever worked on. Ryu and myself took multiple passes on it — and he's an english teacher. We may need a third person to give us a hand for that section. — Deckill e r 06:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, so it's not the most difficult thing, obviously, but it was a tough section to write. — Deckill e r 06:19, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's not so much the grammar as the "This part is good![1] But it's bad![2] But it's good![3]" and so on. I'm not a big fan of the gameplay/graphics/story division (novels aren't reviewed on story/prose/style, are they?), but I guess it's so pervasive in game reviewing that you can't avoid it. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. I think it's the most difficult section to write in a gaming article because of all the aspects of the game, and all the polarized reviews. When we try to balance criticism sections, we end up forcing it to be choppy, so I guess we'll have to live with it — I don't really see a solid solution for that section. Oh well :) — Deckill e r 06:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Final Fantasy 8 - almost there

I really wasn't feeling like the Triple Triad image conveyed anything of value to someone reading Final Fantasy VIII page itself, so I kicked it off and replaced it with the Elvoret fight. I'm also looking into finding a replacement for the Rinoa image. I like it a lot, but I think something that better illustrated the concept would work better. By the way, doing this has really reminded me of how much I love this game. I think it might beat out FFX for me. It's the only one I bought all the toys for, actually. Ryu Kaze 15:08, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't either, but I'm not going to worry about it unless Peer Review or FAC tells us it's bad and needs to be reworked. Ryu Kaze 14:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Agghh, who am I kidding. Of course I'll worry. I'm going to go toy with the wording some. Ryu Kaze 14:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've toyed with it a little. I think it works better now. Ryu Kaze 15:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

You know, I just noticed that we have more images on Final Fantasy VIII than we do Final Fantasy X. I didn't even realize it. I think it's because they all feel so relevant. We've really got some good ones in there, I think. Ryu Kaze 17:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

There was a lot more to my edit than just the "also" thing. :( Ryu Kaze 18:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I understand that part, and trust your judgement there. I was just wondering why all my recent edits were bad. Ryu Kaze 18:10, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Ohhh, it was an edit conflict. Ok. XD Nevermind. Ryu Kaze 18:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I fixed the non-"also" version of the Limit Break line, and then made one for the GFs. See what you think. Ryu Kaze 18:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Looking good. Nice compressions with the story section. Ryu Kaze 03:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Spoiler warning discussion

Sorry. I didn't take how he was carrying on there too well at one point and let it get to me. I realized I shouldn't have. I'll keep it in check. Ryu Kaze 22:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, everything's good. I apologized, and such. I know that on one level your advice is sound, but on another, I don't think walking away simply for the sake of our own patience and mental well-being is the right thing. Otherwise, this'll just happen again with new players. It's been repeating itself for a few years now every once in a while. The hilarious thing, though, is that this particular discussion has been so long that it's longer than the majority of the other ones put together. Hell, we archived once before beginning the line of discussion that you see on the spoiler page right now, and that's over 400 kb now. *sigh* I don't guess Jimbo's going to ride in and lay out a solution for us, is he? He commented, but he didn't put forth a solution we had to recognie.

I don't think he wants to. I know that we're supposed to be able to settle these things ourselves, but there's not going to be a compromise this time. There just won't be. And those few who truly can settle it and decide whether or not spoiler tags become a part of our foundation or if they become something we chuck into the void of cyberspace don't want to. It's really part of the project's purpose that they don't step in except when they really have to.

Sorry for how I'm just sort of rambling here, but I really don't think there's going to be a compromise made among us. Our value assumptions for different principles are simply too strong. Mine happen to be for the principles of the concept we're working on here, but even that's not enough to grant us a quick solution. It's funny to me that these unshakable principles aren't enough to settle something. I know that even policies can change, but the princicple of the concept we're working toward here cannot. We're either working toward that concept or we aren't, and I think that we should be.

Well, I'm going to shut up now. If you're a praying man, pray for a solution for us. I'd do it, but I'm not one. Ryu Kaze 22:55, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, working on the FFVIII page has helped, I can say. It was a good place to put some focus. I also feel a lot more confident in this FAC than I did the last time. Maybe because I know what to expect or because I knew what needed to be done for the most part. But it hasn't been the grueling struggle it was the last time. It also probably helps that we're not dealing with as much information this time.

Anyway, maybe I'll work on something else. I don't know. Kind of want to, but kind of don't want to get invested into too many again. We'll see. Thanks for your advice, by the way. It's always good to have a voice of reason around. At least when it's actually reasonable. XD Ryu Kaze 23:28, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting my talk page, unfortunately, they put the warnings back - VaughanWatch (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is now evading his block with both 64.228.151.85 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and 67.71.85.209 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Could these two be blocked, and my talk page semi-protected again? Thank s a lot. - pm_shef 22:31, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Alright, thanks for taking this on, but be prepared for the CU people to deny the request. If you check out the RfC/U on User:Eyeonvaughan, you'll see that after they discovered the first 52 sockpuppets, the checkuser people got fed up with the whole Vaughan debacle. In the meantime, could we tag them as suspected sockpuppets? - pm_shef 22:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

WoW-style? Sorry, I'm not up with that acronym yet :) - pm_shef 23:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

We absolutely should. For a while there after the first batch of VW's socks were found, they were blocking any more that popped up, but he's been pretty quiet now for a couple months, so this is a bit of a surprise. Either way, his edits are all basically the same, all pushing the exact same (blatantly obvious) PoV, and all attacking me and a small group of other users. - pm_shef 23:42, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day

Happy First Edit Day, Deckiller', from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! User:Deckiller (talk) 06:24, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Michael 02:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Wind Waker FAR

Hey Deckiller, I just wanted to say thanks for helping me out with the FAR on Wind Waker. The article has really improved lately, it was great to finally get some help with it. I'll try to help you out with FFVIII if I can. Pagra shtak 02:39, 15 July 2006 (UTC)