User talk:New Age Retro Hippie/Archive 2

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

Wario[edit]

Hey, you should post the Wario article to the CVG:Peer review. We've been sort of afraid that there wasn't enough animo for this project to be successful, so please don't feel inhibited when you nominate articles. We might have been complaining about people voting for the GCOTW and then not contributing to the article, but that's a different story ;) In any case, in the short time you've been with us you've proven to be a very reliable contributor. Jacoplane 00:12, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Already put it up. And thanks for the compliment. -- A Link to the Past 00:14, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

It would be great if you could go through and help me flesh out Wario. It was desperately in need of a rewrite, but I know I've missed some cameos and given the story of the Wario Land series short shrift. Any help you could offer would be great. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 00:52, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Chaos Chambers[edit]

NonFreeImageRemoved.svg Greetings from everyone at the CC! :D

Donkey Konga[edit]

LttP,

It has come to my attention that the Donkey Konga and Donkey Konga 2 articles have been put under Cleanup and Stub status under your direction. I'm all for creating a more efficient article; How can I help? It would be nice if you gave directions as to what you wanted to be cleaned up. Thanks in advance! MToolen 03:51, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, I for one hate lists. Although I'm not so harsh on small lists, but almost all of the page is a list of songs. Basically, I could have just deleted that, but it would probably have sparked an edit war. -- A Link to the Past 03:58, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Understandable; thanks! Now, any ideas on how we could make these articles better? MToolen 23:56, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

I dunno. I never played the games. -- A Link to the Past 19:50, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

do not remove my links please[edit]

why do you do that? Www.wikinerds.org 04:01, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

I didn't. It was Wikipedia's fault. Although we don't need that much links packed together. -- A Link to the Past 04:06, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia always returns me server errors :( Www.wikinerds.org 04:12, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
...'Kay. -- A Link to the Past 06:53, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Nintendo category[edit]

I noticed you've been adding games to the Nintedo games category, which is something that's been needed for a while, but please be aware that Donkey Kong, Kirby, Mario, Legend of Zelda, Metroid, and Star Fox games have a more specific subcategory and don't belong in the general Nintendo games category. --Pagrashtak 15:19, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

I see no problem with spreading them out to multiple categories. -- A Link to the Past 15:22, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
The guidelines leave wiggle room; I have been following what I thought was a CVG convention. For example, Final Fantasy VI is listed in Category:Final Fantasy VI, but not in Category:Final Fantasy games or Category:Square games or Category:Square Co., Ltd..
Well that's silly. A Zelda game is a Nintendo game. -- A Link to the Past 19:50, August 2, 2005 (UTC)
Which is exactly why Category:Legend of Zelda games is a subcategory of Category:Nintendo games. Doing so in this manner provides a hierarchical format that prevents categories from becoming too big and hard to navigate. --TheDotGamer Talk 20:55, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

re: Fonda Image[edit]

I was looking for a way to rectify that, but could find none. The LOC and several other free-use website have no Fonda portraits, so I replaced the image with one of the stamp. Still not "free use" (rather "fair use"). If you can find a free use photograph of Fonda, please post it. I'm sorry for the issue, I didn't realize the article would be up for FAC so soon. Volatile 01:59, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

WikiStress[edit]

Sorry about your Wikistress level. Maybe a barnstar could help you

Original Barnstar.png

Take care, D. J. Bracey (talk) 22:08, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for that. -- A Link to the Past 13:11, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you vey much for that. Receiving praise from fellow Wikipedians makes editing here far more enjoyable. Regards Ianblair23 13:15, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Talk Page Message[edit]

No, I was removing DreamGuy's nonsense as he's an uncooperative asshole who thinks he has the authority to tell people they aren't "allowed" to be in discussions on talk pages. Pukachu 23:04, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Please review Wikilove and Wikiquette[edit]

Wikilove Wikiquette

I asked you to follow these, because I believe it will help you edit better. As it stands, and as evidenced by your conduct in IRC chat and in your message on Pukachu's page, you are arrogant, rude, and combative.

You do not need to be these things, they are detrimental to getting things done on Wikipedia.

Please take them to heart, and happy editing. Devilbat

I offered to take up your little Wikilove crap if you took back the statement that I grew angered at the reverting of my deletions as a compromise, and you refused. Seems you lack an interest in improving Wikipedia... and an odd zealous attachment to these two ideas for a four-day old user. -- A Link to the Past 01:22, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
No, quite the contrary. I created this account in accordance with Wikipedia policy because I felt like it was time to start helping out and cleaning things up, but I didn't want my old account caught up in any nonsense, it's mostly just edits to floral and plant and cooking subjects. Wikilove is not "crap", it's policy. Please study up and follow it. And your behavior here is very much showing your temper, which is what I am asking you to control in the first place. Devilbat
It's hardly temper. I just call it how it is. Oh, and Wikilove is not policy. And I'm waiting for you to explain why you and Pukachu were made on the same day. -- A Link to the Past 01:40, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Sigh. I wish you would stop with the flaming. As for why we were made on the same day, my guess is that it is a 1/365 chance of happening for anyone. As I stated earlier, I created this account because I wished to do more for the community but I feared what USUALLY happens when someone steps into the middle of a flamewar or edit war and calls for calmness on both sides, and don't want anything bad happening to my old account as I still intend to use it for those articles when I make contributions. Wikiquette is a guideline you should follow, and Wikilove is something you should strive for. I am assuming good faith and offering good-faith help to you, because I assume that you have an interest in making Wikipedia better. Keeping these two things in mind will help you do just that.
Peace and happy editing. Devilbat
Wikilove is not 'policy' or it would have the Template:policy on the page. Just so you know, I know A Link to the Past to be a very constructive user, nothing like what you describe him as. Jacoplane 01:43, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for 'da support. -- A Link to the Past 16:39, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

I see you have been restoring the sockpuppet tag on User:Pukachu. It would be helpful iff you also did so on User:Devilbat, especially since you can see firsthand his abusive and suspicioous behavior above. DreamGuy 04:48, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for undoing "Gavin"(Gabrielsimon)'s removal of sockpuppet info... it's especially stupid as he says only admins can put it there and the part he removed was an admin's comment. He's not too bright. Anyway... you said it is now "proven" -- is this proof on the admin page where they were investigating it, is it the kind of proof you can document so we can change the tags to Proven? It would also be helpful for me to know, because a couple of unruly editors who agreed withthose two were trying to claim I was only calling them sockpuppets to try to shut them out of the decision making process elsewhere (and one admin believed this and made rude comments and insinuations about it) so it would be nice if I could show the proof to people and get them to realize they were wrong. DreamGuy 00:18, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Ask David. -- A Link to the Past 00:24, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
Groovy. Thanks. I found it on his talk page and updated the socks to proven, though the couple of editors and admin arguing with me that I was wrong to accuse the socks of being socks still won't change their minds even when presented proof. Oh well, not much you can do about some people I guess. DreamGuy 06:30, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Peer Review: Wario[edit]

I'll look at it shortly and let you know. Rob Church Talk 22:31, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

First Impressions[edit]

Doesn't look too bad. The first sentence looks a tad confused and could do with expanding just a little more, but otherwise, the prose isn't bad. One too many images, perhaps? Overall, certainly not a candidate for deletion any time soon. Rob Church Talk 22:37, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

FAC[edit]

I am keeping an eye on it. But regarding this article, you still haven't followed the procedures as Wikipedia:Cite_sources#Style_and_how-to that I pointed you to. This article still has no reference section. This is a basic requirement. See Wikipedia:What is a featured article. Christopher Parham (talk) 20:36, 2005 August 11 (UTC)

  • I understand that you did that, however that's not how it's supposed to be. See the featured article requirements:
Accurate: Supports facts with specifics and external citations (see Wikipedia:Verifiability). Includes references, arranged in a ==References== section and enhanced by the appropriate use of inline citations (see Wikipedia:Cite sources).

Wario[edit]

So I updated the images in the article to have the rationale. Also, I changed the references section. One of the pages was down for me, so you might want to update that. Have a look at them anyway. Also, I started a discussion about the whole fair use thing here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computer and video games#Images, screenshots & fair use rationale. hope wario will become a featured article now. Jacoplane 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Looks like the article is going to make it.... 5-0-0 in favor now! Anyway, good job this article is really your baby. Jacoplane 00:34, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

GCOTW[edit]

Gaming Collaboration of the week
You showed support for Gaming Collaboration of the week.
This week Wikipedia:Gaming Collaboration of the week/current was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help.

Jacoplane 11:10, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Princess Peach of the Mushroom Kingdom[edit]

I was just curious what Wikipedia guidlines were on naming royalty, and Princess Peach of the Mushroom Kingdom is what I ended up with. It's a little silly, but because it incorporates the Mushroom Kingdom, which is as well known as Toadstool, I think it could be a fair compromise. -- Norvy (talk) 04:31, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

I guess the difference would be that it isn't common for him to be referred to as King Mario. She's always a princess, whether Toadstool or Peach. -- Norvy (talk) 04:38, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
I'm not suggesting that we go around renaming everyone to fit convention, I was just trying to bring a fresh view to the debate. Sorry it wasn't up to snuff. -- Norvy (talk) 05:03, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

when you deleted that link in the AC article[edit]

I was actually just trying to link to a good AC site. it isn't 'my site'. and you DO get the codes if you sign up. please explain what part of that you think is 'stupid', and why it's spam. It's just a link to an AC site. it was EXTERNAL LINKS. I can link to sites about animal crossing that aren't on wikipedia. that wasn't spam.

A friendly reminder[edit]

Please remember: Please don't bite the newbies. :-) --malathion talk 03:21, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

response to what you said about the link[edit]

I actually gave all of the information about the site I needed for the link to not be rejected... what do I have to do to get it not deleted?! make a project hyrule page?! I DON'T OWN PROJECT HYRULE. I AM NOT ADVERTISING. WHAT AM I DOING WRONG?! Oh, and one of the sites you linked to was shut down, so if you can leave a dead link up, why can't I link to PH?

another thing to tell you before I go... *cries*[edit]

Oh, and on this site, UCs for everything but fish, insects, and the forbidden 4 have codes on this site, and on gamefaqs, there aren't that many codes. and these are special UCs not on any other site unless they take them from PH. They had a very smart guy develop the code generator that made them. So they are not the same. And this site had cracked the code system before most of the sites you linked to existed. they just had to get a new site because of an incident with a guy named genji. or do you already know about that? from how you're acting, I'd think YOU'RE genji!

wait, what am I thinking?! go?! I'm not going to go until this argument is over![edit]

You heard me! I'm not going to just leave because you discouraged me!

response[edit]

I only put that stuff there because usually if you don't give info about the site, the link is taken from the article. now lets make a deal... I put up the link, and you take it down on september 10th.

Improvement drive[edit]

Hi. I have put Wario back on the improvement drive, because you never know, the vote might turn on FAC. I suggest taking it off the list on the day it is featured. But the Idrive-template in the article should probably be taken out while it is on FAC.--Fenice 05:11, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

about the link[edit]

so even though the site is animal crossing related, and is outside of wikipedia, if it's there, it should be removed? That's unfair. External means outside of wikipedia. And this site has to do with animal crossing. AND, unlike you believe, the site IS NOT OWNED BY ME, so I can't be "spamming Wikipedia with your stupid site". oh, and also, IT'S NOT SPAMMING. I only put it in one article, and one that I don't think many people go here of all places to look at...

look at what I took from WP:ISNOT.[edit]

Mere collections of external links or Internet directories. There is nothing wrong with adding to an article a list of content-relevant links

CONTENT RELEVANT. Project Hyrule is an ANIMAL CROSSING WEBSITE. I AM NOT SPAMMING. GET OVER IT.

hey, wait...[edit]

I'm wondering... are you even an admin? do you have the right to say that you could 'block' me? I'm not trying to test your patioence here. I'm just wondering.

response[edit]

The information that can be gained on that forum is codes. codes that can't be aqquired anywhere but that site without the codes being taken from the site. compare how many codes are on gamefaqs and how many are on project hyrule. big difference, huh? and try one of the codes in the game.

Tom Nook: [item's name here] has arrived for you from Project Hyrule

And also, it isn't a 'small invision board'. The statement after actually was just put there so people wouldn't spam and harrass me going OMGWTF WHERE ARE T3H CODEZ. The codes were made member-only because people kept stealing them and claiming them as their own. Why, the incentive to join isn't the codes, it's the community. Oh, and this site has information about animal crossing you or gamefaqs (which only has junk that is A: useless, or B: well known) don't have in this part of the index: << Link deleted - spam filter triggered >> Take a look. They're helping eachother with things in the game. Expanding the amount of AC info on the forum. And a lot of that stuff isn't in the article. Oh, and you harassed me first. that link was as valid as any other, and YOU harassed me. Seeya. I'm going to go contact an admin now (or anything I can do besides that to stop this parade of idiocy we're calling an argument). :) seeya on the flipside.

response[edit]

I meant it was idiocy WHY we're arguing. I mean... We're arguing about A LINK. Ya know what?! Screw it! I'll go somewhere else! And guess what? I thought you were pretty cool before I decided to try to put up that link. GOOD-BYE.

Ahem ...[edit]

Whoever wrote this ...

>>Oh, and on this site, UCs for everything but fish, insects, and the forbidden 4 have codes on this site, and on gamefaqs, there aren't that many codes. and these are special UCs not on any other site unless they take them from PH. They had a very smart guy develop the code generator that made them. So they are not the same. And this site had cracked the code system before most of the sites you linked to existed. they just had to get a new site because of an incident with a guy named genji. or do you already know about that? from how you're acting, I'd think YOU'RE genji!<<


I'm curious what you think you heard about why PH had to get a new site, and why you think there was any 'incidences' with Genji? I happen to know exactly why PH had to get a new server, and it's not because of any "incidences" trust me. And yeah, Genji has a bit of an attitude at times, but considering he's probably twice as old as most of the people that he had dealt with on a daily basis and how they tend to act like babies, it's not surprising why he's bitchy now and again! If he wanted to have people yell and groan at him and be children, trust me, he's got three of his own kids to do that on a daily basis lol!

And for the record to everyone else, PH was one of (if not the first) site/forum to create AC "codes", so let's get that part straight. If the codes you're using come from a different source, but when you put them in they say "From Project Hyrule", then make no mistake, they ARE from Project Hyrule. Sheesh! How hard is that to understand people? I can guarentee you that people over at Gamefaqs don't know what they're talking about half the time, and the rest are thieves. If you don't believe me then take a look at almost all the NES/SNES GameGenie codes on the site, close to 90% of every GG code for the NES/SNES were made by the GGCCC (Game Genie Code Creators Club), and that I know for fact since was a vital member of the GGCCC. So it just goes to prove you can't trust Gamefaqs ... or rather, you can't trust the people who have those "codes" faqs out as they are either liars or thieves!

In my opinion, Bisou is doing a darn good job of taking care of Project Hyrule and keeping it alive and active, and it's sad that people want to destroy all the hard work that PH has done over the years. If you think it's easy to create, maintain, and afford a site like PH, you're mistaken, and I can say that from personal experience here. Why people have to lie, cheat, and steal from PH is beyond me, but if anyone ever wants to really see where a code came from first, go become a member at PH and check it out for yourself. You might be surprised at just how many codes and how many members and how much info PH has these days for AC and ACWW!