User talk:McDoobAU93

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

Gears of War page edit[edit]

Hello McDoodAU93, I am new to Wikipedia and its editing guidelines and I was wondering if I can talk to you about why you removed my "Gears of War" Ultimate Edition" subsection in the Gear of War wiki page. Although the game mechanics are the close to identical to the original game, shouldn't the public be aware that Epic Games were not in charge of remastering the game but The Coalition was and that they had the rights to the game prior to its release on the Xbox One and to Windows 10? XxFASTWOLFxX (talk) 20:43, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

To answer your question: The game is clearly a remaster of the original title, and its existence is discussed in the main franchise article's discussion of the original game. It also mentions that development of said remaster was done by The Coalition after Microsoft obtained the rights to the game. Further, in the article for the game itself, there is a lengthy subhead on the Ultimate Edition remaster. Since it is a remaster, it's not really a new game in the franchise as Gears of War 4 is. I hope that does answer your question, but if it does not, feel free to respond here and I'll do my best to assist. --McDoobAU93 20:52, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Oh okay. I didn't realize that there was a Gears of War Wiki that talks about the game itself and another for the entire franchise. Thank you for clearing things up for me and I appropriate the help. Thanks again. XxFASTWOLFxX (talk) 01:47, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, McDoobAU93. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Incidents at Walt Disney World comment[edit]

I just have to say that I love your comment to the previous editor on the Incidents at Walt Disney World page. Face-grin.svg Elisfkc (talk) 02:45, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks ... thought it was appropriate. :) --McDoobAU93 13:14, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Definitely was. Elisfkc (talk) 18:11, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Intermission on Rescuers Down Under[edit]

Here is footage of it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Jv7BM509xc

And here's a New York Times article talking about it. http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9C0CEFD6113AF935A25752C1A966958260

""The Prince and the Pauper," the highlight of Disney's animated program, moves directly into a planned intermission, with a counting-down clock that allows 10 minutes for the acquisition of "tiny little sugar-coated sticky gooey things," as an announcer says. It is followed by "The Rescuers Down Under," a full-length feature that is longer, more unusual, and a lot less gratifyingly sunny." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.15.86.18 (talk) 16:33, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Even so, it's not really notable; intermissions are not unheard of in movies, so what makes this one special? --McDoobAU93 16:44, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
It contains additional animation that was exclusive to it. Perhaps it isn't worth a full section like I posted, but i'd say that it could be added to the article somewhere. Also, I wouldn't say intermissions are common with animated films - the only other one I can think of is the Toy Story double feature release.
Again, in the view of film history (about 100 years), intermissions are not new. I agree they're not as common as before, but unless there is something specific - and that specific component is documented - that makes this one notable, it doesn't need to be there. --McDoobAU93 17:27, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Like I said, Exclusive Animation. It's not on any home version of the short. https://d23.com/a-to-z/prince-and-the-pauper-the-film/
"Released with The Rescuers Down Under, and included an additional ten minutes of intermission animation, tying the two films together."
Again, not unusual to have filler done by the studios. If you wish, bring it up on the talk page for the article and build consensus prior to adding it back. --McDoobAU93 18:20, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2016[edit]

WPVG icon 2016.svg

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 9, No. 3 — 3rd Quarter, 2016
Fairytale left.png Previous issue | Index | Next issue Fairytale right.png

Project At a Glance
As of Q3 2016, the project has:


Content


To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:32, 22 January 2017 (UTC)