User talk:Monocrat/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello Monocrat/Archive 1, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some good places to get you started!

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style
• Template messages
• Sandbox

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please be sure to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or just three tildes (~~~) to produce your name only. If you have any questions, or are worried/confused about anything at all, please either visit the help desk, or leave a new message on my talk page at any time. Happy editing, good luck, and remember: Be Bold!

FireFox  ^{T C E} 18:01, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi

Hi monocrat, thanks for your suggestions on the Harry Potter article, I really appreciate the help and I hope that in the end you do decide to help out with the article and implement some of your suggestions. *dusts off knees from grovleing*

Later, TonyJoe 07:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi again. I was wondering if you would say in your opinion that the Harry Potter article is ready to be renominated as a good article now? TonyJoe 03:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, again monocrat. Someone nominated HP for FAC. It was quite a shocking thing to leave a page for an hour and come back and see two people tearing into it. Anyway, I was hoping that you would be willing to comment and or vote on the article there, up or down. TonyJoe 05:44, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Chobits Characters

I noticed you put a "B" rated notice on the Ai Yori Aoshi article, one that I have put a moderate amount of work into. I was wondering, how would you rate the Chobits Characters article? Good? Bad? Medium? Does the anime community here have their own peer review section? If so, I would be interested in submitting the article, because I truly want it to be as good as possible, and, as hard as I have worked on it (VERY hard, I basically re-wrote the whole thing by myself), I'm sure it could use many improvements. PiccoloNamek 01:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure, really. The details on how to rate articles are included in "Wikiproject Anime and Manga" box in Ai Yori Aoshi (and which I added to Chobits Characters. AYA looked like it had enough information on plot and character to warrant B (after a very cursory glance or two), but I'm not sure how to evaluate lists of characters like the one you mentioned. I'm new, but the folks around the anime and manga WikiProject seem fairly helpful. I don't know about a formal "Peer Review" for the category, but look around! --Monocrat 01:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Article assessments

Hi, I noticed you were tagging some Bleach articles for certain classes (e.g. Stub, Start). I'm curious as to who did the assessment. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 11:40, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I did the assessment based on the assessment criteria, as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and Manga. The ratings are subjective, and I made it after only a brief perusal of the article, which struck me as lacking sufficient plot or production detail but having too much character information. But there's enough character detail and illustrative links to warrant "Start." As for the character articles I assessed, there's a lot of in-story history, but I couldn't find origins, or parallels with other works. See WP:FICTION. Citations are another issue. If I missed anything, let me know. --Monocrat 12:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

NGE assessment

SeizureDog, first of all, thank you for your help with Excel Saga: it's a much improved article for your effort. Proving that no good deed goes unpunished, however, I wanted to say that I disagree with your assessing Neon Genesis Evangelion as A-class. While NGE might meet the "Reader's experience" aspect of A-class, I don't think it meets the "Editor's experience" or the actual criteria: although it requires "sufficient external literature references," NGE only has two, one of which is Madman's website, the other a reference to a book, the very citation of which might itself be original research. I also think the article could be structured better. I love Eva, and I want to see it reach FA, so I'll leave some notes on the peer review when I have time (I've been meaning to do so, but Excel has kept me busy!). Hope you don't mind my discussing this privately. --Monocrat 14:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I understand your point. NGE is a tough article to rate, as it doesn't fit any class well. I understand that the references point is a tough hit, but I really don't want to knock it down to B-Class. It is much longer and more complete than most anime articles, and doesn't compare to the average B-Class article (compare NGE to Akira (film) or AIR (game)). I think we should adjust our viewing of the scale for own purposes towards anime. As we both know how hard it can be to cite sources (and since it does at least have some), I was a but loose in my assessment and gave it an A-Class. Basically, I felt that even with its lack of sources, it was A-Class in comparision to other anime articles. --SeizureDog 17:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey, how does user-talk-page-communication work? Pardon my noobness. ;) I understand that standards should (perhaps) be different for anime, but we're never going to get an FA if we don't ultimately judge ourselves against the rest of Wikipedia. Looking at some of the comments FACs receive, I honestly think NGE would be ripped apart right now, anime or not. Heck, looking at the FACs, spurred on by your comment, is what moved me to rewrite all of Excel Saga. Beyond that, however, I don't know I agree with the idea of one person awarding A-class: FA requires (theoretically) the (at least tacit) approval of many Wikipedians, whereas a GA requires one disinterested Wikipedian's approval. Shouldn't A-class be somewhere in-between, demanding several Wikipedians? I was thinking of proposing to the project that A-class be awarded only after nomination. What do you think?

Generally you would come back over to my talk page to post your responce. This way, the "You have new messages" thingy flashes up. But in this case, I just refreshed your page so it's no problem :P Obviously NGE isn't worthy of FA status yet, but I feel that it does have all of the information needed to be one, once it is smoothed out and sourced. It no longer needs much expanding, just polish, which is to me what the A-class is all about. I agree with the thought that more than one person should agree on the A-classification though. Perhaps ask a third person to view these comments and give an opinion? I don't see it warrenting more than a three user vote process though, it's not something that needs too much effort wasted on.--SeizureDog 18:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, although perhaps the practice should be ratified by the group?--Monocrat 18:14, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

No need. You're not likely to get more than 3 people to vote in our group anyways. And like I said before, A-Class is not a formal process. Plus when you think about it, a GA only takes one person, it shouldn't be much of a step up from that.--SeizureDog 18:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Go for it. :) --Monocrat 18:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

You're the one who's objecting, it should be your job to find somebody :P Plus I have to take a shower now so I'm rather busy.--SeizureDog 18:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks like I am the one who has been asked. I had already noticed that NGE was rated A-Class and I have read the article through and yes it is thorough and complete in content. There are some minor grammar problems for example: "Just as humanity is finishing its recovery from this disaster, Tokyo-3, a militarized civilian city located on the last dry sections of Japan, began suffering attacks by strange monsters referred to as Angels." (Incorrect tense. Should be has instead of is or, alternately begins instead of began). And reading that sentence I have just realized that it would read better if it were reworded so Tokyo 3 isn't explained mid-sentence.

There are also no references where there definately should be references. When the editor makes a statement with According to then that sentence needs a reference because you are quoting someone. There are three instances of According to in the article, no references of them. The lead of the article should only talk about one aspect of the anime once. The lead currently has some information about the anime as a production and it also has information about the origin of the Plot.

It talks about the production first

 Neon Genesis Evangelion (新世紀エヴァンゲリオン, Shin Seiki Evangerion?) is a Japanese animated television series, begun in 1995, directed and written by Hideaki Anno, and produced by Gainax

Then it talks about the plot and how Hideaki Anno had depression and how it affected the story. Then it goes back to talking about the production again.

The television series aired in Japan from 1995 to 1996, ran for 26 episodes, and was released on VHS and DVD in North America and the UK by ADV Films. The show premiered on Adult Swim on Thursday, October 20, 2005, although it had been previously debuted in the United States in 2000 on KTEH, a PBS station located in San Jose, California. The first two episodes were also shown once on Toonami, albeit in a highly edited form.

The unedited / DVD versions received a Parental Guidance certificate, though some episodes are considered to be stronger than the certificate might otherwise indicate because they deal with issues of violence, emotional trauma, or contain some mild sexual themes.

The plot information in the lead then becomes a case of "scrolling back" because the actual Plot section in much later in the article. Then the Plot section also suffers from "scrolling back" when the reader gets to the Translation notes section. For example under Translation notes the sentence "The term Gehirn is German for "brain". Seele is the German term for "soul". Nerv is the German term for "nerve"." could have been included in context when they are first mentioned in the Plot section. So that's another example of referring to the same content but separated.

Now I don't think that it currently should be assessed as A-Class, but it is the subject of a peer review... I guess I just did a peer review so these issues can be raised on the peer review page if wanted, or they can be fixed. I don't think a reader should be able to find several areas on an article that need work and be able to class it as A-Class, my opinion is to bump it back to GA or even B until that peer review ends. I do think it is close content-wise but it just needs polishing. --Squilibob 23:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

• Noted and lowered. Now we don't have any true Featured OR A class articles. How depressing. --SeizureDog 19:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

• Yeah, but A-class isn't much of a goal, you know? It's right in between two tangible "awards". Seems like if we get anything to A-class it wouldn't take much more work to make it FA. I dunno, A and FA just seem a little too similar to me. Anyways, on a related note, I got my first GA today ^_^ You thought your reviews were hard to cite mine were all foreign. -_- Man it was a pain. It's Believers btw--SeizureDog 19:59, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Heads up

I just noticed what you did with Excel Saga, and I must say That Article has truly come a long way. Not going nostalgic here or anything, but one of my first major contributions to Wikipedia was adding the bare bones of what is now the list of Excel Saga episodes to That Article about two years ago (diff). Needless to say, I learned a bit about encyclopedic writing since then, and I'm not surprised nearly nothing of the original wording survived ;) It dropped out of my sight and watchlist somewhere along the way, but now I noticed that some major restructuring is afoot, and I'm impressed, since the last time I looked about a year ago I frankly considered the article beyond hope. Anyway, if you take it to peer review or FAC, feel free notify me if I don't show up on my own, since I'm still quite attached to both the article and the anime. But enough nostalgic rambling, I just wanted to say that you're doing a great job. -- grm_wnr Esc 22:59, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Rikdo Koshi

"(cur) (last) 14:33, 2 June 2006 Monocrat (Rewrite lead. Standardize to "Rikudou Koushi", explain variants.)"

Unfortunately, your standardization is incorrect. His name is written as "Rikdo Koshi" in all English-language versions of his products. WhisperToMe 02:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

EDIT: It turns out ADV does use Koshi Rikdo (at least sometimes) - But if we followed the MOS to the book, it would have to be "Koshi Rikdo" OR "Koushi Rikudou". WhisperToMe 02:13, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

ADV uses only the one form; please provide me a source for any variants they use. Nearly every episode begins "I, Koshi Rikdo..." in the subtitles, and the copyright notices are in the same name. And the MOS prescribes "the official trade name if available in English/Latin alphabet" before "the form publicly used on behalf of the person in the English-speaking world." In choosing between the Americanization and the form he himself uses, I chose the latter, and I would like to stick with it. I have perhaps erred in placing the surname before the given name, so I'll try to fix that.--Monocrat 02:30, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

""the official trade name if available in English/Latin alphabet" "

In a sense, the names used in the manga and anime versions would have to be trade names too. After all, he knows what names ADV/VIZ/etc use to represent him. In a sense "Koshi Rikdo" is official too since it is on his official product in North America. WhisperToMe 02:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but those are names used for but not by him. VIZ uses "Rikdo Koshi," ADV uses "Koshi Rikdo," JC Staff used "Rikudo" in the background of at least one episodes of the anime. Official sources disagree as to his tradename, therefore I have adopted the one he himself uses. I would say deference for his official romanization should in this case be given to him.--Monocrat 02:40, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

" :Yes, but those are names used for but not by him." - Even so, he still condones the names used. If this was a commonly-used romanization that is not used by any official sources, then this would perfectly fit no. 3. But the fact that, as far as I know, he has to approve of the said naming choices makes it official too. Also no. 1 doesn't say that the person necessairly has to have come up with the name himself. The trade name article on Wikipedia talks about the trade name of a business: "A trade name, also known as a trading name or a business name, is the name which a business trades under for commercial purposes, although its registered, legal name, used for contracts and other formal situations, may be another." - The VIZ/ADV romanization in a sense is used that way in the States. WhisperToMe 02:50, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

The simple fact is that the ADV/VIZ names are names used for him, falling under point 3 in the cited MOS, whereas he himself operates (especially on his official homepage) under "Rikudou Koushi," that name therefore falling under point 1. Variants falling under 1 are to be used in preference to those under 3. Using "Rikudou" also has the advantage of allowing clearer differentiation of the author and his representation in the anime.--Monocrat 03:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I would agree that, since the licensors of the English language releases differ on how they romanize the name, that preference should be given to the romanization the person in question prefers to use when representing himself to the English speaking community, as referenced by Monocrat above. ReMarkAble 01:57, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Another thing - the WP manual of style for japanese specifically states the macron'ed versions of long vowels should be used, and you replaced a couple instances of them with ou. --moof 00:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

The MOS specifically states that the macronned form should be used only if no other form can be found. See point five, "Macron usage..." I think I am in full compliance with the MOS. --Monocrat 00:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Richard III (1955 film)

Have adressed issues that were possible to adress. If you could just give a little more guidance on the FAC page, it would be appreciated. ...._(Complain)^{(Let us to it pell-mell)} 03:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

A point that you pushed a lot has been accepted. The Cast section has been re-tooled. You may want to take a look. ...._(Complain)^{(Let us to it pell-mell)} 09:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Harry Potter Page

Just want to say sorry for the misunderstanding. Simply south 20:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

FAC Excel

Unrelated to the actual debate, I just wanna underline to you that I think you've done an excellent (sorry, sorry) job on the article. While it's one of the best manga/anime articles out there, I don't think the FA bar should be any lower than it is for western pop culture articles, despite the distance-and-language barriers to get comparable resources. For me, the main thing is you keep doing good-article-writing. --zippedmartin 16:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words! And while I disagree with you on the citations, I appreciate the rigor you're putting the article through. I've ridden FACs hard myself, so I expected it. I concur that the standards shouldn't be lowered, 'though I think the article meets them. ;) I would, however, like to repeat my strenuous disagreement with your labelling the article as "dishonest." I have, nevertheless, tweaked some of the wording to hopefully address that concern. --Monocrat 19:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't mean to say I think you're trying to lie to people, but that the article misrepresents its ability to provide commentary on the series. I think your wording changes have helped, but just *having* an article drawn only from those sources is misleading. Not in ways that make much difference to casual readers, but for the kind of resource that wikip aspires to be, it matters. --zippedmartin 19:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Comparative method

Thanks for the feedback - we've added a section on Origins and Development as you suggested. Please let us know what you think. Cheers, sjcollier 21:21, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Poetry an FA!

Poetry has been promoted to an FA, and I wanted to thank you for all your help. Your critiques during its FAC process were right on target and I really appreciated everything you put into it. Thanks! Sam 00:24, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Thinking alike?

The "you have new messages" header popped up when I opened the edit window of the FAC to add my reply ;) -- grm_wnr Esc 13:38, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Excel FAC

Thanks for adding that new citation; that's exactly the sort of thing I was looking for. I'm tempted to support the article--as I noted earlier, I think the overall approach and tone is spot on, which is a rarity for articles in this field--but I find Lee Bailey's objection too persuasive to do so at this time. With regards to that, you might want to ask a few people in Category:User_ja-4 or Category:User_ja-N if they could help you find some Japanese sources. --Robth^Talk 04:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

FBI

I cleaned the history up a bit. Please leave your comments on the FAC page so I see them. Thanks! --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 17:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Updated the FBI page. More comments welcome! (as you can see... targeting the FBI article for FA status is my main goal. :)) --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 18:40, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Working on sub-articles to expand the two other divisions. Adding a summary to the FBI article is good for now I understand that. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 19:06, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I added the dates to the divisions and and working on the "sub" articles, but those arn't my primary focus right now. To understand what you are suggesting... to remove the "units" in the divions and talk about the general history? Wouldn't that make the Orginization section "stubby"? --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 21:57, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Today's mission— great success!

Excel Saga is a FA now. Way to go! Any plans on where to go next? (let's just say that your stated intention of tackling NGE is interesting, but errr... ambitious) -- grm_wnr Esc 03:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

BarnSakura

This BarnSakura is hereby awarded to Monocrat for finally getting the Anime/Manga Wikiproject a Featured Article. Awarded by SeizureDog 07:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Well duh, you deserve it mate. --SeizureDog 07:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Megatokyo FAC

Have your objections on the Megatokyo FAC been resolved? If not, what still needs to be fixed? If so, can you strike out your objection? Many thanks for your help. --L33tminion (talk) 15:42, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

• On another note, the article has recently undergone a massive copyedit. You might want to look it over, Monocrat, to see if the prose issues have been taken care of. JimmyBlackwing 01:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Serial Experiments Lain

Hi! I've been doing a little work on the Lain article recently, and now i've fallen short of ideas. I saw that you have some responsability on getting us THE Good Anime Article, so I was wondering if you would mind having a look and maybe letting me know what's urgent to do before I put it through peer review.... Cheers for the great work anyway!--SidiLemine 17:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Golden Boy (manga) GA

An absolute pleasure, I also caught the message at the last moment after wondering about the image removal. You did great work on that article and the GA is well-deserved. - Phorque 05:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Musical theatre

Hi there. Can you please take a look at the statements that we make at musical theatre regarding Anime, manga and Japanese musical theatre and see if you have any thoughts/comments/corrections? I am guessing that you know considerably more about this than I do, and my research about it has only scratched the surface. You can probably just open up the article and search for "anime" and "Japan" to see what statements are made. Note that musical theatre focuses on stage shows, not TV or film. Note also that we are trying to broaden the article's perspective beyond English-language London/New York musicals, to the extent appropriate. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 21:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Flabby flabby flabby flabby

I count four times so far that you've used the word "flabby" to describe my writing. I've commented on FAC a bit, often specifically on language and style, and it actually wouldn't occur to me to talk that way even once about anybody's good-faith contributions to the encyclopedia. It wouldn't matter how wretched I thought their prose, I would still be mindful of the effort and find less offensive words. Are you going out of your way to be hostile? Have we met, have I offended you in some way? Bishonen | talk 22:28, 2 November 2006 (UTC).

Serial Experiments Lain

Hi Monocrat!

I've been doing some more work on Lain since GA, and have taken on the foolhardy task of presenting it to FAC. There's still one or two things to do before it meets all the demands, but the one I've found hardest is to satisfy criterion 1a. Prose is not good, and certainly not brilliant. Would you mind helping with the copyedit? Any improvements suggestions are also very welcome. --SidiLemine 16:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! These are all very interesting suggestions, and I'll look into them very close. Removing the other publications will make the article prettier. About merging the plot and characters sections, I like what you've done with Excel, but for Lain that would probably mean to delete the characters section, and that's it; only Lain and Eiri Masami are really important, and her family is already described in the lead. I'll ask the other editors what they think about it. I asked Grm wnr if he would help, I hope he'll have time! Well, thanks for your time. Let me know when you need imput with the list of Excel Saga media; and I look forward to working together on NGE!--SidiLemine 19:31, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Excel Saga

I agree it's a quite big change but I was correcting an error so i allaught myself tho change the page... The translitteration made in the ADV's DVD subtitles is wrong... the name of the character is Il Palazzo, you can see that here Il Palazzo. Sorry if my speach seems to be unpolite but english is not my lenguage, I'm italian (other reason why i know that the name is Il Palazzo XD) I'll tell about the change in the discussion page of Excel Saga before re-doing it...--Tin6789 14:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tin6789 (talk • contribs) 14:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC).

Thanks!

That's very appreciated. As you saw I'm starting to concentrate on NGE, but my guess is that it will be a loooooong time before I even start editing it. The quantity of sources of all kind is just freaky. I have a feeling that we coul just write the article the way we want, and say about anything we please, and we would probably find a different source for every single statement made. What do you think? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by $yD! (talk • contribs) 09:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

I see what you're saying about the quantity of sources; I'm just concerned about the quality of them. Even though this is a pop-culture article, I'd really hate to rely on out-and-out fan-sites, even for statements about fan-reactions. My personal test is: 1) Is it commercial? 2) If not, does the author or site have reasonable credentials? Anyway, the biggest weakness, I think, will be the lack of Japanese reactions. This isn't Excel Saga, that was relatively cult even among anime fans. This is Evangelion. My Japanese professor, who was probably here in the States getting her doctorate when Eva first came out, knows about the show. Fortunately, this is Eva, so there is a mass of articles in Newtype-USA and elsewhere. Perhaps I'm just prattling on pointlessly. :)--Monocrat 19:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure, sure. As said on NGE talk, I'm trying to get through all the staff interviews first. I think that's as good as it gets in terms of credibility, and anno left so much mystery that everyone is going with its own version! I just think the discussion comparing the different philosophers is a bit overkill, as we won't find a source linking this discussion with the anime. (or will we?) No, I'm not worried about having to rely on fan-sites. Most of the interviews in the web are even from print papers, so that's all good. You're right about Japanese reaction, thought. It might not be the easiest thing to find, but apparently (NGE talk) LainEverlasting is looking deep into it. We'll see when you get there; right now I'll work on Influences and Interpretations. --SidiLemine 13:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't destroy anymore articles

You erased perfectly good stub for Slayers Royal, redirecting to the article where the game IS NOT EVEN MENTIONED. Did you even think? Don't do things like this anymore, and think in the future. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.234.60.154 (talk) 10:06, 22 February 2007 (UTC).

Anime South Deletion review

The Anime South article that you originally commented on was re-created and immediately deleted. At the very least, this should not have been a Speedy Deletion. 15 new citations created an article which allows it to meet Wikipedia notability guidelines. I would appreciate any comments you have in the Anime South deletion review. Since the article's deletion prevents it from being reviewed, the citations are listed below:

-Animesouth 18:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Please re-rate Black Cat article

Can you please re-rate?

Thank you,
Samantha Lim88 02:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Excel Saga CC.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Excel Saga CC.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 14:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Excel Saga DVD 01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Excel Saga DVD 01.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 14:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Excel Saga DVD 02.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Excel Saga DVD 02.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 14:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Excel Saga DVD 03.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Excel Saga DVD 03.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 14:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Excel Saga DVD 04.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Excel Saga DVD 04.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 14:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Excel Saga DVD 05.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Excel Saga DVD 05.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 14:15, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Excel Saga DVD 06.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Excel Saga DVD 06.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 14:15, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Excel Saga DVD IC.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Excel Saga DVD IC.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 14:15, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Afro attack.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Afro attack.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 escription 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. --23:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Kabapu.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Kabapu.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) 12:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:ACROSS (Excel Saga).jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:ACROSS (Excel Saga).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) 12:33, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Excel (Yarisugi).jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Excel (Yarisugi).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) 12:34, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Excel Saga vol 09.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Excel Saga vol 09.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) 12:34, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Menchi (ending).jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Menchi (ending).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) 12:36, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

FAR notification

Excel Saga has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:50, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I have found a few books that would help greatly in keeping the article as an FA. Please check them out at the FAR. Jappalang (talk) 01:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Excel_Saga_vol_09.jpg

I have tagged Image:Excel_Saga_vol_09.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I've put this image and the Across cast-shot on List of Excel Saga characters. Let me know if that's okay with you, and I'll remove the orphaned tag.--Monocrat (talk) 04:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

That's fine. :) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:28, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Meetup

Wikipedia:Meetup/Tampa -- You're invited! Hires an editor (talk) 20:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Excel_Saga_vol_09.jpg

I have tagged Image:Excel_Saga_vol_09.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. Otherwise, it will be deleted in seven days. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 17:45, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Excel Saga characters

I have nominated Category:Excel Saga characters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. TTN (talk) 01:09, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Golden Boy (manga) delisted

As a major contributor to Golden Boy (manga), this notice is to let you know that the article recently underwent a Good Article Reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps. The article was delisted as a Good Article for failing the good article criteria, as detailed at Talk:Golden Boy (manga)/GA1. Thanks. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 19:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ACROSS (Excel Saga).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ACROSS (Excel Saga).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. Skier Dude (talk 04:20, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Excel (Yarisugi).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Excel (Yarisugi).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. JaGa^talk 06:56, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Daitenzin.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Daitenzin.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:28, 4 April 2015 (UTC)