User talk:X201

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

Image tagging for File:ZX Spectrum Vega+ concept image.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:ZX Spectrum Vega+ concept image.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:31, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about The Occupation[edit]

Hello, X201,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether The Occupation should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Occupation .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.


Slatersteven (talk) 15:35, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Recent edits to Dirt: Showdown and Colin McRae: Dirt 2[edit]

At Template:Use dmy dates it states:

However, it is common practice for archive and access dates to use the alternative ymd format. This usage is valid and is specifically mentioned at MOSDATE. In those cases, the archive and access date formats should not be altered when fixing dates.

I have not corrected your edits as I did not wish to deny you the opportunity of fixing up the mess you have created. (talk) 16:59, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

There's no mess, the dates are correct and none are corrupt. You've quoted a paragraph from a template instruction document, that portion was added in 2014 by an anonymous user that only made four edits. It is an outdated piece of text, if you read the Wikipedia Manual of Style, specifically MOS:DATEUNIFY you'll see that it is now preferable to for all dates to use the same format " it is permissible to normalize publication dates to the article body text date format, and/or access/archive dates to either, with date consistency being preferred.". I'll raise the point about the incorrect template text. - X201 (talk) 18:52, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

L.A. Noire[edit]

L.A. Noire, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 23:15, 30 March 2018 (UTC)


Just so you're aware, I was unaware I had reverting anything else on the Good Morning Britain (2014 TV programme) page; I thought I had hit "Edit" on the current edit, especially since I didn't paste anything in my editing; all that was intended was to re-adjust the infobox. I do apologize. livelikemusic talk! 14:14, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

No problem. It's sorted now. - X201 (talk) 16:12, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

VG infoboxes[edit]

Thanks for adding infoboxes to VG articles! I added a number of articles to Category:Video game articles needing infoboxes. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:ED97:6899:CBC0:1616 (talk) 01:45, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Upcoming changes to wikitext parsing[edit]


There will be some changes to the way wikitext is parsed during the next few weeks. It will affect all namespaces. You can see a list of pages that may display incorrectly at Special:LintErrors. Since most of the easy problems have already been solved at the English Wikipedia, I am specifically contacting tech-savvy editors such as yourself with this one-time message, in the hope that you will be able to investigate the remaining high-priority pages during the next month.

There are approximately 10,000 articles (and many more non-article pages) with high-priority errors. The most important ones are the articles with misnested tags and table problems. Some of these involve templates, such as infoboxes, or the way the template is used in the article. In some cases, the "error" is a minor, unimportant difference in the visual appearance. In other cases, the results are undesirable. You can see a before-and-after comparison of any article by adding ?action=parsermigration-edit to the end of a link, like this: (which shows a difference in how {{infobox ship}} is parsed).

If you are interested in helping with this project, please see Wikipedia:Linter. There are also some basic instructions (and links to even more information) at You can also leave a note at WT:Linter if you have questions.

Thank you for all the good things you do for the English Wikipedia. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Edge magazine for Lumines series?[edit]

Do you have any Edge issues that cover Lumines series in any way? Interviews, reviews, updates, etc? I'm attempting to make Lumines Live! and Lumines Supernova into actual articles, and not redirects for the Lumines series.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 23:25, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Polar Express.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:The Polar Express.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:51, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Word of caution[edit]

In regards to this edit, you generally should not switch reference styles from inline to list-based unless you get consensus first, per WP:CITESTYLE. --Masem (t) 13:31, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

OK. It was the 'Wall-O-Ref' in the lead that tipped me over the edge. - X201 (talk) 14:33, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
Moving refs out of lede to body is 100% acceptable per WP:LEDECITE, though they'd still be inline citations and not list-define. It's just the change between inline and list-define that is generally frowned upon. --Masem (t) 15:19, 25 June 2018 (UTC)