User talk:Draconins

Welcome!

Hello, Draconins, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Karm a fist 05:26, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for your kind words! Good luck to you, too. Nach0king 09:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry for using your talk page but I started a new discussion in Shinn's article talk page so could you reply to what I wrote, And sorry for this but I have sent a message for Evoulder guy and he doesn't reply to me and his contribution still the same from a long time maybe he travels so could you please visit Destiny's article to see the new 2 Pictures that I have uploaded if they are good and if you agree to keep them or not, Reply in my talk page, Sorry again. Astrys 02:07, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, replied. Draconins 03:21, 30 June 2006::(UTC)

Hi, I have replied in the talk page of Shinn's article. And sorry again for using this section and your talk pageAstrys 19:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you helped in improving the MSes articles(from Destiny series) but could you please visit this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:ZGMF-X42S_Destiny_Gundam

And read about the Weapons section, Sorry and Thanks.Astrys 20:16, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I don't know if it possible to use your talk but you said that my messages violating the Help:talk page, So if it possible turn this into a discussion and if there are anything good write it if you want I wont write anything, And if what I done in your talk page is wrong delete everything immediately.

For the interview source this is the site

http://community.livejournal.com/gundamseed/630863.html

and you can search in http://www.aeug.blogspot.com/ to read it

And about the Films reviewer from any country I don't care about what they are always saying because they aren't the designers of the series they don't know as the writer and the director and Simply I don't beleive what they said before and what they will say next when they wrote their reviews about the series the take it from one side the side of the characters from the first series, So I don't know if it's possible but if that is true and Shinn is the bad guy and ZAFT is the villans sooooo Djibril,Auel,Sting,Stellar.......... are the good guys and then if the series was presented from Shinn's POV so everything Shinn's done from ep1-50 is wrong true, Then could I ask you why there aren't anyone who said that Kira is a bad guy in the first episodes(when he was fighting anyone and disabling anyone) he was true in that or what he was doing was good for everyone, Ok noone can say that Kira is a bad guy because he is the protagonist of the first series and he is the only person that never says or does wrong things the person that working for everyone not himself while the others(except his friends) who are his enemies working for themselves.

So in short words or to make it easy for everyone to understand Shinn is the Boss of Devils while Kira is the Boss of Angels/Gods. reply in my talk page.

Astrys 00:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

could you please Visit Destiny Gundam talk page.Astrys 00:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About the source, I will cross check it later since I am not sure about it as I never saw it in any japanese source I have. Anyway, reviewers can show what common people think so it may show that Fukuda failed to mix his message. I believe what writer intend to do may different meaning to his writing, it possible that it is also the case. Don't forget, even seiyuu and animators can change feeling of the series by different expression. So not only the writer we must consider, rather we also consider feel of the staff too.

If you ask why Kira is almost never stated as bad guy, that has many answers. I appreciate your opinion. Your answer maybe one of them, however I think it only contribute small portion. I see Shinn as an anti-hero, whatever he fights Kira or not since he fight with reasonable amount "ambition to kill". Kira may had killed some but he never intend to (or at least has lesser intention) and mostly sad after it. The justice which Fukuda say, I completely disagree with him. As my previous argument, many (including me) love peace but love freedom more. What justice shinn had? She only fight for his nation, which is I think it is correct if only that in case. However, Shinn thought revenge, killing, and even defend Destiny plan which supress others' freedom? And for many people, he is selfish and egoistic. Even his superior say he even fight to his superior, which is shown also in Minerva (see early episode). I never see Shinn as completely wrong, however he "clearly" isn't fit as an hero, I only see him as mercenary who just not seek money but revenge.

What Kira doing in disabling anyone, in my opinion is simple. Just think when two kids fight each other. One possibility to make them along is to punish them together (it is also in education psychology subject). Draconins 08:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User comment in Talk:Shader

Thank you for mitigating the issue in the talk page. I was trying to figure out a way to reply to the issue. I'm still not sure this is the correct way, but at least it now sounds much better than it would have had.

I wish you a good day,
MaxDZ8 talk 13:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

How are you (apa kabar) Draconins? And welcome to Wikipedia! Just to let you know, at the Indonesian WikiProject there are a group of editors collaborating to improve the articles related to Indonesia. We hope you can join us to make the project even better!

Here are some Indonesia-related project resources which may be of use:

Hope you find these useful. If not you can improve them, it's Wikipedia!
Okay, happy editing and take care.

Cheers -- Imoeng 12:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

That is a good idea, the page is already at 70kb long and should be split into smaller chunks. MythSearcher^talk 10:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was just merging everything for now, it is easier that way. Copying the things I have changed on the 70kb page is easier than going through every single page. MythSearcher^talk 10:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OMG, that will take some time. MythSearcher^talk 10:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Gundam files

Just thought I respond here since the deletion review is already long enough. My endorsing MythSearcher's plan doesn't mean that I'm against providing any of the deleted information as I previously promised. I just think that it will work better to start with a framework and build it up instead of trying to start with the previous articles and cut them down. This should produce a cleaner, more encyclopedic article. Also, as I said earlier, I think any undeletion should wait until the deletion review is closed, but following that if you feel you need the articles I will provide them.

Assuming the closure stands, I would like to agree on some time table for when the undeleted files could be redeleted instead of just leaving it open-ended. There has been some issue with this in the past of deleted files being undeleted and userfied for the purpose of performing merges or other requests to get at the information in deleted files and then the articles just hanging around indefinitely in user space. —Doug Bell ^talk 12:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't mean I do not trust you. I just want to say that we don't need to enforce totally a new article. Sorry, if I am not clear enough. Draconins 09:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Yeah, emotions have been high and well, policing ourselves is better than having them make a fuss about it on ANI, etc. :P Kyaa the Catlord 08:00, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Freedom phaseshiftoff.JPG

Hello, Draconins. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Freedom phaseshiftoff.JPG) was found at the following location: User:Draconins/ZGMF-X10A Freedom Gundam. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 04:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Universitas Indonesia.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Universitas Indonesia.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You maybe interested in the Article Rescue Squadron

I notice that you are part of Category:Inclusionist_Wikipedians. I would like you to consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia.

Ikip (talk) 01:02, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of minor Mobile Suit Gundam SEED warships for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of minor Mobile Suit Gundam SEED warships is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of minor Mobile Suit Gundam SEED warships until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Claritas § 11:50, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of minor Mobile Suit Gundam SEED spacecraft

The article List of minor Mobile Suit Gundam SEED spacecraft has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fancruft. The members of this list by definition are of little importance to the storyline of Mobile Suit Gundam SEED - there's List of Mobile Suit Gundam SEED warships and spacecraft for the significant ones. The article is entirely in-universe, and there are no secondary sources which discuss its topic.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Claritas § 02:57, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]