User talk:A Nobody/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search



This might be more helpful than the original stublet. Antandrus (talk) 16:47, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks and added. Hopefully that will be enough to allow me greater time beyond the discussion to find additional sources, which I am expecting to turn up due to the sequel coming out and thus increased coverage in magazines and the like. Thanks again! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 16:54, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Nintendo Princesses

Here you go: User:A Nobody/Nintendo Princesses Not watching here, so please let me know if you need anything else :) StarM 17:54, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 18:01, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars Languages

Have you commented/ voted here: ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:04, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

No, as I am currently looking for additional sources. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 21:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I saw that. Thanks for working on improving the article. Just so you know there are an awful lot of delete votes, so it could be deleted at any time. Maybe you want to post at the AfD that you are adding references and in-line citations (which seems to be the main concern)? I guess you're going to do that... I just wanted to make sure the article was still around. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I have to go to class in a few minutes, so here is what I recommend:
Refute the "arguments" for deletion. The nominator claims that the article is unsourced, which is no longer true. The nominator claims that a Google Books search does not turn up significant treatment, which is also not true per this edit in which I found a published encyclopedia that covers these fictional languages across several pages from a Google Books search. You might also note that per the first pillar at Wikipedia:Five pillars, about Wikipedia "incorporating elements of...specialized encyclopedias", the fact that the languages are covered in a published encyclopedia makes it consistent with our first pillar of incorporating elements of specialized encyclopedia. You can also refute the first delete with all those red links in it, that they are apples and oranges comparisons. This subject appears in a published encyclopedia. Those other subjects do not. The claim that it is original research is also no longer valid due to the efforts to add secondary sourcing. Finally, the claim that it is not notable is also debunked as we have already found multiple secondary sources with out of universe information, which therefore makes it notables.
Seek help from relevant wikiprojects, such as Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron and Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars. You can also notify those who have worked on the article of the discussion using {{subst:Adw|Article title}}.
Anyway, I hope that helps. Reasonable editors will take note of the efforts to improve and new sourcing and will be influenced accordingly and open-minded. Good luck! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 22:07, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Featuring Halloween

I have started a discussion thread about getting the Halloween article up to FA status. Your comments and participation are most welcome.--otherlleft (talk) 16:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, one I would appreciate help with is List of characters in The Nightmare Before Christmas. Thanks! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 17:04, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm no expert at bringing lists up to snuff but I'm happy to give it a shot when I'm home from work later on today. However, the opening line confuses me . . . is the list supposed to be of all characters in the movie, or only the ones that are in the movie and the video game?--otherlleft (talk) 17:29, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I think of the main characters that are notable because they appear in both franchises. --A NobodyMy talk 17:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
My reading of WP:CLN is covered in detail at the AfD. You're working hard on this; you should put in a vote.--otherlleft (talk) 18:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. It was admitted off-wiki that certain editors show up at AfDs in which I participate to disrupt them. So, I do not like to comment in AfDs anymore as it had become clear that should I comment in any, it will be disrupted by these other editors. I have successfully identified a number of sock accounts that are now blocked; however, the individuals behind those accounts occasionally reappear and the main way they do so is to stalk/harass my comments in AfDs. So, we're all better off if I do not comment in those. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 18:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
That's unfortunate. Well I will see what I can do when I can actually focus on the article; for now providing arguments to influence other editors over there is my best contribution.
As always, I'll continue to help referencing and working on the articles under discussion; as long as those participating in the discussions notice that improvements are underway and amend their "votes" accordingly, it's not a big deal if one less editor (me) doesn't comment in the actual discussions. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 18:43, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

(indent) I managed to screw this up so I rolled it back, but I suggest you clean up the references by adding a "ref name" parameter. First time you use the same reference, give it a name (I tried backbeat, as in <ref name="backbeat">). Each time you want to use the same reference, do it like this: <ref name="backbeat"/> and it will keep the reference list tidier. It may also avoid the impression that you're packing the references. I want to avoid a possible edit conflict so I'm leaving it up to you!--otherlleft (talk) 01:40, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I have an odd feeling that I might make a similar mistake. Anyway, for now I am trying to see if I can find any sources for this and for Languages in Star Wars. I'd rather find the sources and cite them first and then worry about the format. The priority is convincing everyone that the article's are worth keeping; once kept, we can then focus on the fine tuning. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 01:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Cat names

I am going to put my comments on the article's discussion page. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay. Cool username, by the way! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 17:07, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
First of all, I completely rewrote the cat name article. I believe it passes muster now. Have a look. Secondly, the Star Wars languages article has a lot of well reasoned keep votes, so it should be okay. Have you indicated your preference on the AfD? Voting you can (Yoda speak). Thanks for the compliment on my name, some day I'm going to make it colored. I was thinking Child (red) of (white) Midnight (blue). :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:40, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. It was admitted off-wiki that certain editors show up at AfDs in which I participate to disrupt them. So, I do not like to comment in AfDs anymore as it had become clear that should I comment in any, it will be disrupted by these other editors. I have successfully identified a number of sock accounts that are now blocked; however, the individuals behind those accounts occasionally reappear and the main way they do so is to stalk/harass my comments in AfDs. So, we're all better off if I do not comment in those. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 18:20, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


Well, I gotta give credit to you for taking the iniative. Sometimes I step on people's toes when I'm being sarcastic, but I pretty much like everybody here, and I'm a big fan of Wikipedia. Best wishes. Mandsford (talk) 17:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome and thanks for the kind words. I like most people here, only a handful I am essentially convinced are not here constructively or are not reasonable, but c'est la vie. In any event, "We try until we succeed." Regards, --A NobodyMy talk 17:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Lists of

I noticed these "list of" articles are contentious. I would suggest leaving the words "list of" out of article titles. I think "Cat names" is a better and more encyclopedic title than "list of popular cat names".

Plus, Wikipedia is search driven. So the chances of someone searching for "list of..." seems far-fetched to me. But in any case redirects would be helpful for these articles (as well as links from the parent article). Just a couple thought I wanted to share. Maybe there should be a "List of Wikipedia characters" article, or my preference "Wikipedia characters"? Take care. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I would not be opposed to merging and redirecting that list to an article on Cat names. I am rarely ever opposed to merges, redirects, renames, etc. as compromises; I just do not usually see good enough reasons for outright deletion. To me, outright deletion needs to be reserved for topics that are hopelessly beyond any measure, i.e. that are hoaxes, libelous, etc. I see the real value in a paperless encyclopedia as being the ultimate compendiums of human knowledge. After all, our first pillar states that we are a collection of general encyclopedias, specialized encyclopedias, and almanacs and any look through of those three media will come across large numbers of lists, tables, etc. To me, articles like List of characters in The Nightmare Before Christmas, another one I am currently working on, serve a sort of table of contents like role as navigational tool to other articles. By the way, I always find it (can't think of the word) that some say flat out dishonest things like "unsourced" for articles that are sourced. --A NobodyMy talk 00:52, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite

Who's the other editor? I want to see what the competition looks like. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:06, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Hint: notice the main other editor I have collaborated with today. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 03:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
A careful study of contributions should clue you in on that other editor :-P. --otherlleft (talk) 03:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I haven't had a chance to look into Other L. Left's work, but I think it's fair to say yours is scary, nightmarish and perhaps ghoulish. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally I assume you noticed this edit to the article you've been working on: [1]? Seems a bit dubious to me. But until I know more about this "off wiki" drama you've alluded to I better keep my distance. :) MJB and I are in agreement on that subject. ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

If you are curious about the off-wiki drama, just send me an email. What you will notice in some of these fictional character discussions will be that some just think all fictional character articles must go. Well, my feeling is something like Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ashley_Lorette should end in deletion as I could not find any sources to add to that article (I look beyond just Google, too). By contrast, something like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Babs and Buster Bunny should close as keep, because we can easily reference these articles and as such I see no reason why we wouldn't at least redirect them as legitimate search terms. But they key is to be discriminate, to acknowledge which ones can be referenced and which can't. Unofortunately, a handful of editors are convinced that these articles can never be referenced and then when they are will dig in just to win the discussion. If you want to get a sense of who are good, open-minded editors that are a pleasure to work with and who will really discuss, look to Erik, Dennis Brown, Mandsford, Themfromspace, Omarcheeseboro, Colonel Warden, ChildofMidnight, etc. are all open-minded editors and reasonable editors whom I consider assets to the project. Some among the list will even help us in the efforts to rescue the articles under discussions. What makes these editors good is that they'll hold us to a certain standard that forces us to improve the articles in question, but once we do start improving the articles, they will acknowledge those improvements and change their stances accordingly. Regards, --A NobodyMy talk 17:49, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Well put and I generally agree. For better or worse characters from pop-culture have substantial interest. So even the minor figures in that strange Pumpkin movie you are working on are probably appropriate to include in an article on that topic. Any time someone refers to, but doesn't elaborate on controversy, it seems interesting. Investigating some of the on and off-wiki dramas has been an interesting enterprise for me, particularly as I have had some "interesting" experiences of my own... Anyway, thanks again for the invite. I'm going to continue to check out the deletion lists to find the gems that needs polishing. But I'm not ready for any "official" role in that regard. Stay cool. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, if you're up to it, I have also been working on this one and would appreciate any additional expansion, copy editing. I think it is at least mergeable by now, no? Best, --A NobodyMy talk 18:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Ummmm... I took a look. That's above my pay grade I'm afraid, and I don't think you'd be happy with how I'd vote on the subject. I respectfully suggest you return to more pressing matters ie. the Lanuages in Star Wars and UFO related entities. We must "Prioritize". :) But if you prefer to be known henceforth as Wikipedia's Don Quixote of lost article battles... well... there you have it. I guess I'm guilty of suffering from a severe case of recentism. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:40, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


No problem. Why try to salvage the article, though? Content could easily exist on the film article and the video game articles; you could pitch a delete and say that relevant content has been added to these articles. —Erik (talkcontrib) 17:52, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I really like the article for navigational purposes, i.e. as a table of contents of sorts to the other articles and as a means of not overwhelming the other articles, i.e. as a means of focusing on the characters. I think the marketing and reception sections demonstrate that the characters have a presence that transcends any one of the individual medias. We don't currently have to my knowledge an article on the franchise as a whole and were it to be merged, maybe that would be the route to go, i.e. something like Nightmare Before Christmas franchise. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 17:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Dizzy Devil

Thanks, I just !voted that it should be procedurally kept as it's an insane way to do these AfDs. Not sure what it's going to anount to StarM 19:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

It's not just the renomination, it's that it's currently redirected while the discussion is underway, which means anyone going to that article will not see the AfD template. I don't think it is appropriate to redirect an article while the discussion is underway and especially not appropriate to redirect two days after a discussion closed as keep, i.e. going against consensus unilaterally. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 19:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha, I don't know if there's anything against re-directing during an AfD as I know I've done it myself (especially in schools when the outcome is a foregone conclusion). I'll look a bit into that. I have a feeling this AfD is going to close as m/r for simplicity sake to keep someone from doing what TPH did again. Not saying it's right, but I have a feeling it's what's going to happen. This is why I get sick of AfDs for the sake of AfDs, they just waste time. StarM 19:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
My concern in this case is two-fold: first, the user who did so had been sanctioned by arbcom (check his block log) for disruptive redirecting/going against consensus; second, if the article is redirected then anyone going to the article will not see the AfD template and thus not participate in the discussion for good or bad. So, it seems a way of limiting discussion or going around discussion. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 19:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. I know his history and as I said somewhere, I'm surprised he hasn't yet taken me to DRV because in most cases that I've closed there's no consensus whatsoever to delete. Merge, maybe, but that doesn't need an AfD and I don't think the solution to "Someone will overturn my merge" is AfD. I've just reverted his re-direct and will note same in the AfD. StarM 19:33, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Okay, thanks and have a pleasant afternoon! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 19:34, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
No worries, you too! StarM 19:37, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


Heya, I was wondering if you could do me a favour. Previously, before you had certain off-wiki problems, you posted a bunch of references in some articles relating to a journal article (in EGM I think) on fictional weapons analysed by a weapons expert or military historian or something along those lines. Could you check in that magazine, if you still have it, for any references that could be potentially used in gravity gun? -- Sabre (talk) 21:58, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Dear Sabre, yes, I do still have that magazine and would be happy to look through it; however, it is at my parent's house and I am currently on my university's campus for classes. So, I won't be able to look through my game magazine stack until the weekend (I am going home for my birthday), but again, I am of course happy to do so when I go back home. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 00:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Electronic Gaming Monthly describes Half-Lufe 2’s Gravity Gun as the "thinking man's death tool, this weapon let you toy with gravity to kill foes with everyday objects." Call of Duty series military advisor Hank Keirsey says that the weapon his not very practical. He does, however, discuss its historical precedents: "The ancients learned very early how to use gravity to their advantage--but this usually involved rolling rocks down hills or pouring boiling oil down the castle walls. Those that failed to respect gravity suffered. For example, the guys that based their plan of attack on rolling rocks up hills--Google Sisyphus: That's a name of a guy, not the disease of your college classmate--or pouring the boiling up the wall." The gaming magazine gives the weapon a lethality level of 2.[1]
Thanks, I should be able to integrate that into the article quite well when I get back to it in a few days. -- Sabre (talk) 20:00, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Happy to help! Take care! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 20:01, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

IP Address

Hi, thanks for the welcome, heh heh heh, I've been a member for a few months now, but oh well, i forgot to log in when i contributed... Ffgamera (talk) 05:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome and happy editing! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 16:20, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Out of this World

I noticed you did some edits to a certain UFO related article with a very long title, but I couldn't see any changes comparing the diffs. It's almost as if something otherworldly passed through that article, without leaving any physical evidence of its presence... ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I eliminated unnecessary spaces between the text and the references. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 16:20, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
So you're saying there's no evidence of extra-terrestrial or para-normal activity in relation to that article? ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
? --A NobodyMy talk 02:02, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the support!

Thanks for supporting me at my successful Rfa! Hope to work with you again in the future!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:30, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, congratulations, and good luck!  :) Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 19:08, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Photograph of Sally toy from NBC.jpg)

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:Photograph of Sally toy from NBC.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:23, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'll see if I can get it into an article. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 19:15, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
It was in List of characters in The Nightmare Before Christmas; it was removed by an editor who maintained that it was impossible to tell what it is. It really is a pretty indistinct image; maybe another one would be a better choice.--otherlleft (talk) 19:54, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Could/should we use any images from the other Nightmare Before Christmas related articles? Best, --A NobodyMy talk 19:55, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Well done

CPR Barnstar.png The Barnstar of Recovery
for Herculean efforts on the part of List of characters in The Nightmare Before Christmas otherlleft (talk) 21:19, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 02:02, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:Photograph of Sally toy from NBC.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Photograph of Sally toy from NBC.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Spartaz Humbug! 23:01, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Happy Birthday

Saw somewhere you were celebrating, Happy Birthday fellow Novemberian. StarM 02:30, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you and if it is/was your birthday this month, then Happy Birthday to you as well!  :) Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 02:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm next Sunday so looking forward to a good day. Uh oh, don't tell the date police I just wiki-linked *and* piped a date. :o StarM 02:35, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, we watched UFC 91, so I hope you have a nice and fun party as well! I really wish I could show you the cake, as it was pretty cool, but it would reveal my real-world identity to possible undesriable onlookers. In any event, a good time was had by all and my brother bought me Rock Band 2 for the PlayStation 3. I have not tried the guitar or drums yet, but singing is a blast! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 02:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Who says we don't learn things on talk pages, I had to click both of those links because I don't know much about fighting or video games. For my birthday I plan to possibly go to a museum I enjoy, eat at my favorite restaurant and then enjoy a hopefully good football game. We'll celebrate my birthday the following Thursday when family is in town for the holiday StarM 03:07, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, I definitely hope that y'all have a fun time and that you get nice gifts! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 03:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
It's your birthday? Oh, I am not going to bake you a cake -- I have a habit of incinerating food rather than cooking it. So please allow me to give this birthday blessing to one of the finest people I've encountered on Wikipedia:
Thanks! You are a good guy! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 15:47, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Sweetie Pie

Is now at User:A Nobody/Sweetie Pie. Happy Birthday as well! MBisanz talk 12:58, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you on both accounts! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 18:32, 17 November 2008 (UTC)



Here you go. MBisanz talk 13:23, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Would you be okay with my merging this content and then creating a redirect? Best, --A NobodyMy talk 16:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

My Rfa

Admin mop.PNG A Nobody, thank you very much for participating in my Rfa, which was successful with 80 Support, 5 Oppose, 6 Neutral. The comments were overwhelming, and hopefully I can live up to the expectation of the community.

I would also like to thank my nominator Realist2 and my co-nom Orane (talk), and special mention to Acalamari and Lenticel (talk) for the kindness from the start. Regards, Efe

--Efe (talk) 07:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, congratulations, and good luck! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 16:07, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you to all who participated in my RFA- regardless of whether you supported or opposed, all feedback is important to me. I look forward to proving in the coming months that the trust placed in me by the community is not misplaced. Mizu onna sango15
The Barnstar | My RFA | Design by L'Aquatique

MOSBarnstar.png The Mizu onna sango15 Barnstar
Thank you to all who participated in my RFA- regardless of whether you supported or opposed,

all feedback is important to me. I look forward to proving in the coming months that the trust placed in me by the community is not misplaced.
Mizu onna sango15Hello!

That is by far one of the most original and cool looking RfA thanks I have yet received! Anyway, congratulations and good luck!  :) Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 00:28, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
    • ^ Electronic Gaming Monthly features seven notable video game weapons and for each of them divides the profiles into sections headed as "The Gun," "Keirsey says...Practicality," "Historical precedents," and "Lethality level." See Evan Shamoon, "Gun Show: A real military expert takes aim at videogame weaponry to reveal the good, the bad, and the just plain silly," Electronic Gaming Monthly 230 (July 2008): 49.