User talk:Mithos90

Welcome!

Hello, Mithos90, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History merge

I've requested a history merge so the edit history from your talk page here will be copied here for your records. So don't be alarmed or anything by the template! :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All done. ♠P M C♠ 20:06, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Future films

Hey, hope you're doing well. Can I suggest checking out the notability guidelines for films? The guideline stipulates that film articles should not be created until release or notable production. Warcraft has not begun filming, so the article should not exist just yet. That's why Warcraft#Film adaptation exists, so early development information can be placed in that section. When filming begins, we can re-create the film article. This is done because many film projects, even notable ones, are stuck in development hell for years. There's no indication that this project will be fast-tracked. Even Superman took 20 years to finally come back to the big screen, you know? So in the meantime, filming information can be added to that section. Let me know if you have any questions! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in regard to Neon Genesis Evangelion (live-action movie), the project doesn't seem to be filming at all. Per WP:NF, you should request for all verifiable content to be merged to the article of the source material. Who knows, it could be 20 years until they make the film for that one. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:43, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can see if you can propose deletion for each article. This means a template will be added with an explanation why the article should be deleted, and if nobody removes it in five days, then the article will be deleted by an admin. If it is removed by anyone, though, then you should see about merging any verifiable content from the article to the article of the source material (in this case, the Soul Caliber video game, the Pac-Man video game, the Splinter Cell video game). You had good finds! I have Splinter Cell (film) on my clean-up agenda; just hadn't gotten to it yet. I'll add the other items that you've found. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want a hand in addressing these articles of films in development hell that you found? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mortal Kombat

The article wasn't under a user name, that was a user's sandbox. You moved a page you should not have. The article was not ready for existence on its own, thus EVula was working on in their sandbox. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:12, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I moved it back already. You may want to contact EVula to find out why they haven't moved the article into the mainspace yet. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Don't worry about moving the article from someone's sandbox to the mainspace. The original article was deleted, so it was userfied to EVula's sandbox so content could be preserved until the film begins production -- if it ever does. I have User:Erik/Isobar (film) myself -- I created the film article before I was familiar with Wikipedia's guidelines, so when I realized the film wasn't going to happen anytime soon, I saved it on my userspace. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:24, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nightmare

Bloody-disgusting is reporting from an "insider", which is considered a scooper and doesn't meet Wiki's reliability criteria. If it's true then we can wait till New Line officially announces something. Even then, we'll want to incorporate that as a subsection title "prequel" or "remake" or "sequel" (depending on what it is), until the movie comes out and we can fill in crew information. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:15, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Cloverfield Mix.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Cloverfield Mix.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cloverfield Mix.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Cloverfield Mix.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) 20:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Cloverfield Mix.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Cloverfield Mix.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 19:45, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Bloodrayne II.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bloodrayne II.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --20:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Clover Dead.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Clover Dead.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) 05:05, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gears of War 2 Article

I'm glad you brought up and fought for the Adam Fenix and Ending Dialog. The important thing is that you put the information out there. alby13 (talk) 12:12, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gears 2 Template

See WP:MOSCOLOR. A few months back, I also tried to color a few templates, but was likewise told it was discouraged. Unless it's absolutely necessary to color the template, then we shouldn't do so. -- Commdor {Talk} 19:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still, I haven't seen that many vg-related templates utilizing a color scheme. In fact, the only templates I've seen using colors are those about branches of government and I think one about Star Wars. It stands to reason that coloring templates is in fact discouraged, and these other colored templates are somehow special cases. Since I don't decide policy, I'd recommend asking around as to why some templates can be colored but some users think the practice is discouraged. If you could obtain proof that coloring templates isn't discouraged and is actually permitted, then I would step aside from the matter and you could re-add the color to the Gears of War template. -- Commdor {Talk} 18:56, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fable II Edit Summary

I think this edit summary was uncalled for. Your previous edit was unsourced. How much vandalism would get onto the site if we allowed every unsourced comment to stick around? If you'd provided a citation before, then there would have been no problem whatsoever. On this note, use Template:Cite_web in the future. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 09:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I took so long to respond. I got caught up in things.

"Stating that the editor who took it out should have known this tid bit of information had a small hinch of fact in it..." Why? Vandals have done stranger things before. They did what they thought was best.

"When I added it my mistake was I did forget the source but not only one person can do a whole article right?" I direct you to my edits here and here. Editors can do anything if they put their minds to it. Take the LotR article. I hate that game. I swore blood vengeance against it. yet I still managed a neutral POV. If you had a citation for that, do what I do, make a hidden note next to what you added, saying that the citation will arrive in a short while. No-one will delete it.

"Besides that I did add the source myself and I really do not see any reason on sending a message to me about that as I did not put a individual user down and I was pointing out editors who do that in general." It was more the way you said it than anything you said (and what on Earth does 'Po po' mean?). Yes, it didn't look like vandalism, but then, there are vandals smart enough to make edits like that. Chances are, the editor was just feeling jaded at the time anyway by vandals. I know I've been like that before. Besides, I can swear that was hanging around for months without a citation anyway. --Thejadefalcon ^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 16:03, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time to write a full response, so if I don't appear by Thursday, prod me because I've probably forgotten.

"assumed someone else would put it in knowing most editors edit articles that they are most familiar with (seeing now thats not the fact -,-)" Most do, but not all of them. The odd one may have arrived from another page. Besides, not everyone can know everything about a page. That's why Wikipedia is a site that anyone can edit, because anyone could have a valuable addition.

"I am not that big of a wiki person so I don't know how to add a invisible code including a side note" It's , for future reference. --Thejadefalcon ^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 16:05, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Someone can at least take a quick second to look for the statement" They may not have time, like you didn't, or they may have tried, but not come up with anything.

"until someone elses does the work for them." Well, to be fair, there is, as I said, hidden messages, fact checks (if they're added in the same edit, then people usually understand that the author is re-searching for the citation) or, if all else fails, but a note in your edit summary. It's not guaranteed that someone will notice it, but it's highly likely. --Thejadefalcon ^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 15:52, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Original_Limited_Edition_Fable_2_Bundle.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Original_Limited_Edition_Fable_2_Bundle.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 02:16, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Super 8 poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Super 8 poster.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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]