User talk:AFigureOfBlue

Removal of backlog

I am confused by your recent actions. I normally remove this template from the more inclusive parent categories and only leave it place on the subcategories that are specifically backlogged. I am not sure why it would be more useful to do it the way you have. Can you please explain? --BirgitteSB 06:09, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

My view is that some of the cats were pretty redundant... e.g., Category:Merge by month and Category:All articles to be merged, so I combined them together by having Category:Articles to be merged as the only one with {{backlog}}. Some of the cats (like the convert to SVG cats) only had a few files in them, so I just moved the backlog template to the general Category:Images that should be in SVG format, but most of the changes were just because it seems kind of silly to have both the by-month and all-in-one-list versions of virtually the same list in the backlog, since they're just different ways of sorting the backlogged articles. That also had the effect of making it look like there were a lot more backlogged articles than there actually are, which could discourage some users from trying to work through it.

As another example, the entire purpose of Category:User-created public domain images is so that they can be copied to Commons (at least, that's what I understand), so why not make it a subcat of the backlogged Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons? Category:All orphaned articles and the by-month categories listing the same thing are redundant to have on the list, so why not just use Category:Orphaned articles? In all cases, I was just compiling virtually identical problems together so that navigation would be easier and more standardized.

If you'd like some additional explanation, or have further questions/concerns, feel free to ask! -Drilnoth (talk) 14:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The merge categories are sort of messed up with onflicting template right now, so I will ignore that right now Although I don't have an issue with generally placing the tag on the parent category alone when ALL subcategories are backlogged. But I think SVG image subcategories should have backlog simply removed from the cat that only had a few images (Someone took care of a previously existing backlog!} I personally went through those a month or so ago and I am certain there was a backlog there. If the backlog is on the parent category for SVG images and some subcategories have only a few images, how will a person coming there from the backlog category know what is actually backloged. I am not sure about the purpose of the user created public images. But I don't have an issue with the orphan one so long as no one comes along and removes the listing because the link to cats that do not have the backlog tag on them again [1] [2]--BirgitteSB 18:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough with the SVG and other things like that where some subcats are backlogged and some aren't... I'll properly tag them again later today, if you'd like. Anyway, most of the changes I made were similar to what I did with the orphan page, so it shouldn't really be a problem. I plan to update the list later today to fix cat names and counts, although nothing should really be removed. -Drilnoth (talk) 19:47, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the only with more more than ~50 articles was Category:Convert to SVG and copy to Wikimedia Commons, so I've tagged that with {{backlog}} but left the others untagged as they don't contain enough items to really be a "backlog." I guess the graphics lab has been doing some good work! -Drilnoth (talk) 20:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes it looks like they have! Thank you for reexamining this.--BirgitteSB 04:56, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Welcome! Right now I'm working on Template:Backlog progress as a better way to track remaining backlogs than the current list. -Drilnoth (talk) 14:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

The biggest problem with using that sort of graph is that all except two of large number categories are continually growing. I suspect over half of the dated categories are growing but I haven't paid as close attention to all of those. Compare to approximately a year ago I am trying to remember to take monthly snapshots of the list since the new automatic feature make historical views uninformative. There will not be any progress to show and you will run out of screen space.--BirgitteSB 22:14, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Ugg... good point. I'll userfy the template (in case I ever do want to use it) and request as speedy on the redirect. -Drilnoth (talk) 22:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

A-Class discussion

Drilnoth - this is the message I'm leaving on talk pages of people who signed up: Hi, we're starting the discussion on A-Class here today, thanks for signing up! I hope you can present your views. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 07:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

GA review of Braid (video game)

Hi there. Please be a little more thorough in your GA reviews. Sentences such as "Blow also specifically avoided using a first- or third-person view for the game like these other title had done as, despite the fact that the time effects are better experienced from those perspectives, some of the puzzles in Braid would have been impossible or more difficult in any other perspective." are not indicative of Good Article quality (there are myriad problematic sentences in this article). Thanks, BuddingJournalist 17:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

D'oh! Thanks. I'll be sure to keep an eye on prose in the future... sometimes your brain just reads things the way you think they should, not the way that they're actually written. -Drilnoth (talk) 17:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive

Hey Drilnoth. I've done 40 articles for the backlog drive, and I was hoping to check in with you, since I know you will be reviewing everything for the awards at the end of March. I was just hoping that you could check and see if everything is in order for me. I have three pending, but I expect they will be finished well before the end of this month. But if there is some sort of problem with one of my GANs or something, I'd hate to find out only 39 counted and then I was ineligible for the big Barnstar. I figure since there is still a little bit of time before it's over, you can let me know if there are any problems and I can try to address them or (if need be) review a few more articles. Please let me know. Thanks! --Hunter Kahn (talk) 01:44, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure! I'm not going to give all of the articles a detailed read or anything, but I'll be sure to let you know if there seems to be any problem with them. I'll let you know in a few days. Great work! -Drilnoth (talk) 01:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Fighters D&D 4.0.....

Are there any ranged feats that fighters do not have access to in 4.0? I looked really quickly (so may have missed something) and didn't see any feats that fighters would be precluded from taking that would inherently make them any worse ranged combatants than any other (including epic feats). What precludes a fighter who specializes in ranged combat from doing that as well as another class in 4.0? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.96.33.121 (talk) 20:37, 4 March 2009 (UTC)