User talk:J Greb/Archive Aug 2009

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

Hawkgirl

Hey, man. "Just as clear" with her leg covered in purple? And don't you think that the other image presents a less contorted pose than the current one? —Lesfer (t/c/@) 14:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Opinions? —Lesfer (t/c/@) 18:16, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Both present a good image of "bird in flight" and the bulk of the modern costume. Frankly, the one covered leg is very much a non issue. - J Greb (talk) 18:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
If you say so, ok. Regards —Lesfer (t/c/@) 00:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Guess what?

No, go on guess.

Ok, I'll tell you.

Our buddy is back!

Please block as sock of indef'd twit. ThuranX (talk) 04:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Manhunters

Just a heads up, I recently reverted and corrected your change to Manhunters. I'm guessing it was just a mistake on your part, you reverted an infobox back to a point when it contained incorrect material. I'm not sure why you didn't just update the existing template with what amounts to two lines of text, but your mistake has been corrected. --Xero (talk) 12:15, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Yup... and other mistakes restored. Please see Talk:Manhunters#Infobox. - J Greb (talk) 14:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
And I changed it back because you are still wrong. The Jack Kirby special introduced the Manhunter Cult and Mark Shaw, they remained human up until the Millennium crossover when they were revealed to be androids. Then later an actual non-robot Manhunter cult was revealed to Mark Shaw, one which consisted of a large alien feline. The cat alien was later retconned by Mark Shaw's appearances in the Kate Spencer Manhunter comic which revealed that to be an hallucination. Therefore the first chronological appearance of the android Manhunters was Justice League of America #140. I know this thing, because I have actually read all these books. --Xero (talk) 17:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Xero, stop at what was happening with Shaw during the 1970s and 1980s. IIRC the link between the androids and Shaw crops up there. So there is potential room to quibble over the writer that gets credit for creation and the "1st appearance". The art though is stil Kirby, all Dillon did was appropriate the design. The first appearance though is a thorny piece since it relies on one of 3 assumptions:
  • Englehart did/didn't come up with a new concept for the story and the recycled design got attached to it.
  • Englehart did/didn't deliberatly revise Kirby's origin story for Shaw.
  • Kirby did/didn't intended the Shaw story to link directly to the Paul Kirk stories he had done in the 1940s.
Also, as pointed out on the aticle's talk page, you are missing some of the things the template automatically does as far as the "debutmo", "debutyr", and "android" fields. The first two build and link the first appearance. The last one automaticall puts the article into Category:DC Comics robots.
- J Greb (talk) 17:50, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
You were right and I was wrong. And I let my annoyance with the initial reversion get the better of me. Once I realized this I took some time away and came back to correct my mistake. --Xero (talk) 20:46, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Supervillain template

I noticed what you said about the template. I can shorten it and show only the more important ones. At first the template was created to be an personal template for me to get to them and get to know them faster kinder like a shortcut and that can be an good reason for the use of it for anyone else so I decided to use and if it is crammed I can shorten it. As you may know the template has more than one page. That was an accident but now I do plan on using the Template: villians for an subtemplate (or whater you call template with template inside it) for DC and an future Marvel villian template another one which I planned on doing and maybe others. I plan on leaving just the template on the other page Template:DC supervillian. The template may not be the most important but it's efficiant I think once I finish trimming it but I respect your opinion if you think it needs deletion I just hope it doesn't. I will try working on it one last time. Captain Virtue (talk) 22:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


I agree with what you just said if there is one thing that I would put out if you notice inside the edit template it specifically says please don't add anying or delete without discussing why first. And then I would hear them out and approve or disaprove, normally if someone would argue why a character would be in there it's because he maybe does in some respects like arguing that the Ventriloquist should be in the Batman enemies section. So in a way I don't mind if they add one they just need an strong reasoning in the talk page before adding. Captain Virtue (talk) 16:09, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Big Point

Now I suppose you have seen the Batman: Reborn disscusion page and you are probably thinking of a way to come up with an answer to those links, come up with your answer and look at the Battle for the Cowl disscusion I added something there. Also relating to the Blackest Night: Batman here is a link [1]. Here is my favorite paragraph from the link: Honestly, I hadn't planned on picking up Blackest Night: Batman. I love the work of Peter Tomasi. Especially appealing is his return to writing Dick Grayson, who has recently taken the reigns of Batman. But for reasons I shall divulge, I simply wasn't very excited to pick up this tie-in title. My reasoning for this was relatively simple. Blackest Night has long been touted as a Green Lantern story that encompasses the entire DCU, but for whatever reason, I never really felt the desire for the tie-in books, even after the Final Crisis ones were so successful. In addition, when I heard that Blackest Night: Batman would be somewhat dealing with the unanswered questions of Bruce Wayne's death, I balked. Who else should really answer those questions besides Grant Morrison? --Schmeater (talk) 01:43, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks let's just put the past behind us.--Schmeater (talk) 01:01, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey can you check out Battle for the Cowl. --Schmeater (talk) 02:24, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Battle for the Cowl

Can you prove to Schmeater on Battle for the Cowl's disscusion that what he posted is a big assumption.--Stinkysoxmon (talk) 17:04, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:A.D.A.M..jpg)

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:A.D.A.M..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 'file' 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 "File" 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) 21:20, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:AquamanBlackestNight.JPG)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:AquamanBlackestNight.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 10:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Firestorm06.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Firestorm06.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Question

We have reached a new period in the Battle for the Cowl Discussion go there. --Schmeater (talk) 18:13, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

RfC on Talk:Lockjaw and the Pet Avengers

Hoping you could comment on Talk: Lockjaw and the Pet Avengers, User:Asgardian and I are debating on the box image, and you always seem to have a good sense of image related discussions. -Sharp962 (talk) 19:49, 21 August 2009 (UTC).

Final Questions

I just need you to answer three more question's answer them calmly please, and then I'm just going to keep finding reviews. --Schmeater (talk) 19:25, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Firestorm

As an admin would you please help/mediate the discussion? If possible also call users to give their opinions about it. Regards —Lesfer (t/c/@) 20:31, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

{{X-Men characters}}

I was wondering if I could get a little adminstrative help. I had started the template intending to sandbox it, but instead, I wasn't paying attention and ... started the template. If the said template were deleted or some other reasonable recourse that would be much appreciated. -Sharp962 (talk) 19:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC).

Thank!-Sharp962 (talk) 19:26, 25 August 2009 (UTC).

Orphaned non-free image (File:Scarecrow judgement.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Scarecrow judgement.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 23:48, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Green Lantern Corps/Sinestro Corps

Sorry to bother you, you were the only Admin I noticed in the conversation on Talk:List of Green Lanterns. I noticed that a good deal of the Sinestro Corps article bios are also drawn word for word from the same place. In one or two cases, it's possible to talk about other events, but for the most part I don't see any way around the Copyvio other than simply removing the section altogether. Before I did anything that drastic, I wanted to ask your opinion. Thanks for your time. Sodam Yat (talk) 06:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from X-Men: Nation X

Hello J Greb, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to X-Men: Nation X has been removed. It was removed by GentlemanGhost with the following edit summary '(It's already been prodded once; it needs to go to AfD now)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with GentlemanGhost before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Nav box

Here is the Smallville one. We don't seem to be keeping track of any TfDs that involve them. I've been going through the August logs, and this is what I've found so far: Raising the Bar. I don't know if these are the only two, if there are more beyond August (in the past), or if this is the first wave of what will begin. In both cases I found, admin Magioladitis (talk · contribs) was the one who nominated them for deletion. You may want to ask them, as they might have better insight into that area.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:58, 31 August 2009 (UTC)