![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Would it be fair to include a "Yes, but to an extent", and include a footnote mentioning that much newer software can't run if the hardware doesn't support required features? Wikinium ( talk) 18:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Current revision of that article looks fine to me, kudos to you and the other editors for bringing that spat to a consensus. Breadblade ( talk) 06:29, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:17, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, but you are wrong about this, gamindustry IS NOT source of numbers, blog from SuperData (which is completely unreliable source) is THE source.
90.144.32.15 ( talk) 16:58, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Nonsense, im reporting you. Random blogs arent reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.144.32.15 ( talk • contribs) 17:01, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Superdata is one in line of internet analysts who demonstrated on many occasions on such blogs how wrong their numbers are becuse their numbers were compared to existibg official numbers. And in this it is just someones BLOG from there.
If you can get OFFICIAL verification of those numbers be my guest and revert it, until then remove them from wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.144.32.15 ( talk) 17:09, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Along with any other info cosisting any of superdatas numbers. They are NOT reliable source, no matter which media passes their blogs on.
90.144.32.15 ( talk) 17:12, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
You will be reported too if you keep reverting this 90.144.32.15 ( talk) 06:54, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
From WP:VG/RS "This list is neither complete nor can it be used as definitive proof regarding a listed source's reliability determination" 90.144.32.15 ( talk) 07:05, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
And MORE "Articles related to video games need reliable sources like any other Wikipedia article—content must be verifiable" 90.144.32.15 ( talk) 07:09, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Reports incoming 5.39.157.198 ( talk) 19:24, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
I added Android to the list of platforms on the Half-Life (series) page and you reverted it for some reason. Half-Life 2 runs on Android (NVIDIA Shield devices) natively so that is an incorrect reversion. I have fixed it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pacnet ( talk • contribs) 21:08, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
If i Cant send you link i thought you should see it in you tube that they have hardcore punk and mathcore in them just look at Howord jones vs jessie leach vocal battle if you don"t believe me just check out the 1999 demo"s then hopefully you see my point and provided sorces Jg9443 ( talk) 22:14, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
I am trying to prove that they are in the punk rock lead just for example rise against is an american punk rock band Jg9443 ( talk) 17:47, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Yet again i am going to give evidence but diffrent big and juicy something you cannot denied i am going to give the websit the source and the link of the video that they say that they are punk rock just give me little while and latter you"l know what is their main lead genre. Jg9443 ( talk) 18:00, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
OK i put melodic hardcore in my page if you change it to rise against is a Chicago punk rock band instead of rise against is a american melodic hardocore band you scratch my back i"ll scratch yours. Jg9443 ( talk) 23:13, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
OK i put melodic hardcore in my page if you change it to rise against is a Chicago punk rock band instead of rise against is a american melodic hardocore band you scratch my back i"ll scratch yours. Jg9443 ( talk) 23:14, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Sorry i did not no but that does not give you the right to change my page to rise against is a Chicago punk rock band and i gave the the information i had the evidence. Jg9443 ( talk) 00:12, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
By the way the last time i checked punk rock is a genre and one question strike annywere is melodic hardocre why cant you put that there ? Jg9443 ( talk) 00:31, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Just to be easy just to serge to change it please i am also getting tired of this but i will not quit. Jg9443 ( talk) 14:40, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
I just saw this. What the... Thanks for reverting. -- Soetermans. T / C 08:40, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
So. Maybe add this tittle in new section "Authentication reiquired in past" with descrption "released on GOG"? Eurohunter ( talk) 19:20, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Just because you say there's a consensus, doesn't make it so. Also you have no proof there's any connection between me and the other IP. Unless you're a checkuser, you can't make that allegation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.216.79.210 ( talk) 22:33, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
I reverted your change since both titles are different products as their name indicate. As Nintendo state on its website, "Skylanders SuperChargers Racing for the Wii and 3DS: Fans can augment their SuperCharger experience with a complementary, dedicated racing combat game -- Skylanders SuperChargers Racing -- for the Wii™ system and Nintendo 3DS™ hand-held system. All-new tracks, augmented with power-ups, boosts, hazards and more, offer up to 50 different and exciting gameplay experiences. On Nintendo 3DS, gamers can go head-to-head with competitive multiplayer via local play or online with up to four players. Iconic Nintendo character Bowser™ and his Sky vehicle, Clown Cruiser are available in the Skylanders SuperChargers Racing Starter Packs for Wii and Nintendo 3DS and can also be played on the Wii U™ system. The Supercharged character not only works in Skylanders SuperChargers Racing, but also as amiibo in compatible Nintendo games, so players can store their saved data in both modes with a simple twist of the figure's base.". Also, Maxime Montcalm, the game director of Skylanders SuperChargers Racing explains in an interview with GamerGen (in French) why this game isn't a port: "Le porter à partir de la PS4, c'est un gros défi, alors le porter sur Wii, personne n'était capable de faire un jeu d'une qualité semblable à la PS4 et la Xbox One. Donc quand on nous a demandé de faire un épisode Wii, on a tout de suite décidé d'en faire notre projet."
Also, Guha Bala, president of Vicarious Visions, confirmed in an interview FamilyGamer TV, that Beenox helped develop Skylanders SuperChargers (race tracks, power-ups). Nintendo Life states "Beenox, which is responsible for the Wii and 3DS games, has also contributed these Kart Racing modes to the main Wii U (and PlayStation and Xbox) experience.". Facteur Geek, upon visiting Beenox during the game launch, confirmed this was well (in French): "Le mode aventure fut développé en grande partie par l’équipe de Vicarious Visions, studio d’Activision alors que le studio de Québec Beenox, quant à lui, s’est attaqué à la partie course qui est très présente dans le titre. C’est donc dire que la version Wii et 3DS sont les bébés du studio car elle ne possède que le mode course.". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Francois Taddei ( talk • contribs) 23:25, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for letting me know. Yes I own the site but I'm trying to add the news whichever is new or not yet added, please do check i'm not trying to add anything unnecessary.
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sohelmoldhariya ( talk • contribs) 20:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I own the website that's correct but as you noticed all the info which I linked was legit and was related to the topic. if you think it's wrong please let me know. I post latest news related to anime, so just trying to update news and also link it to wiki.\
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sohelmoldhariya ( talk • contribs) 20:29, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you and here I have a news and it's confirmed and also mentioned in WIKIA of Dragon Ball Super. https://otakukart.com/otakublog/anime/super-saiyan-blue-female-whis-s-real-names-champa-s-identity-revealed and not yet posted anywhere else — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sohelmoldhariya ( talk • contribs) 20:56, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
i have been using wikipedia for years and everyone has their own way of editing, i have made contributions here that i know for a fact that before i put them no one in said article has, i'm not a pro at editing and or citing the sources cause well i'm not here 24/7 but i do contribute and i don't just make stufff up, i look up the info from places and websites and just because you don't see all the facts in 1 area doesn't mean you cant find them elsewhere, now regarding articles some articles in here in wikipeidia can also be used as sources, i don't see why sources within wikipedia can't also be used because they were put there by other who sourced it, now i see some atcles that have some parts sourced, others they don't have everything sourced and yet the info is still there, even though some information isn't linked doesn't mean that its not true or doesn't exit, i actually plan to source as much as i can but i'm not a pro here, no one has told me how to edit, i learned all this from seeing others edit, the coding in how to extend title boxes etc etc, i learned from what others have done...and its unfair that i'm being suspended because i try to make everything as accurate as possible, trust me i know the information i put isn't made up but its sourced, i just got to put it there where i get it from, i rememeber putting information on articles that no one has bothered to look up and since i put them people have used it and built on that, no one else has done it before me, and the information is correct but no one made the effort to look it up...I DID ;/ ...and i'm being suspended fojust because i'm thorough and want to make the best articlee as i can, if that's the case why don't you just let users make their ow version of articles for their own personal use..i thought we were all suppose to work together here..and i do not , i repeat do not make up facts, everything i put is what i have seen from websites , i might not have been able to put links to all of them but no one has taught how to do things here, i learned all this myself from other editors works.. no one is born knowing everything, the way i do my contributions is as thorough and specific as possible because i blieve it makes it easier for people to know exactly what said article specifications are, yes we all don't get it erfect but i look up the information , there's many wbebsites i get my sources from, credible websites, it doesn't always have to be the websites from the creators of said device because lets be honest some device makers don't reveal their devices full specs always because they don't want the tech-savy and more intelligent consumers to know cause they know how to decide which is better, im that type , i dont just buy things and not knowing their capabilities or features, i don't understand how some editors revert back to a simple article that btw is missing facts, so basically its a bunch of boxes with little to no information on them cause those editors were too lazy to look up the information, there r many articles n websites that hjave detailed specs of devices , just because the device maker doesn't put them because they're afraid of the competition would outdo them in specs or users to pick the more powerful or most featured device doesn't mean we all don't have the right to know the full feature set of a device, i got all this information from legit articles for example look at this one, some of the information here is sourced from wiki itself , meaning the same info that its in some of these SOC's is that's in other articles here and they match, now regarding facts about clock speeds and performance if a same model GPU for example runs at 600 MHz with a flop count of 600 gflops and another of the same model or family but clocked higher at 700 mhz then its common sense to figure out that for each 100mhz speed it adds 100 gflops even though its not mentioned there in the article because someone didn't fill it out, if it has the same specs but different clock speeds or cores than its not heard to piece 2 and 2 together..do you really need to be told what X means in 2 + X = 5? no because we can just figure this out on our own, maybe the device maker didnt put it there to avoid competetion , maybe they forgot to put it , but the truth of the matter is that some things you can figure it out if you have the smarts for it..some of these articlesi see online besides the ones in wiki go into detail about all the internals or specs of a device but ofocoruse the device maker wont always tell you exactly what all the features specifically for obvious competition reasons.. i mean theres formulas to calculate flops and they vary depending the type of graphics architecture etc...take a look at this article..its def not posted by the device makers but the information there is accurate because it was gathered by other articles but also form people who prob also tested the performance of devices, well in this case GPU performance...the WII U was never told by nintendo its CPU clock speed because they know that people would compare it unfavorably to the competition but the truth is even if your device is inferior you shouldn't hide the facts of its specs which is why some users actually took the device apart and tested the CPU cpeed of the Wii u to get its clock count, nintendo or ibm never wnet into detailed about because they know the PS4 and X1 would outperform it by several times, just because the device maker doesn't post the full specs doesn't mean others wont figure it out test the hardware, the only reason why we found out the gpu clock speed of the wii u is at 1.24 ghz was because someone took it apart and tested it...they did tests, calculate, etc to come out with the specs, they didn't just make them up, now i know articles posted by people who havent made the devices make mistakes , i mean we re human we all make make mistakes but even the device makers make mistakes as well but the truth of the matter is that most information about a device is usually correct and i see many articles here that doesnt have every single detail sourced yet its there because they didnt put it in there i mean can you imagine an article that has lots of details but has every couple of words sourced i mean, having sources is good but u can get alot of information about a device from 1 article at least but ofocurse its good to put as many as possible that has the specs to match the sources, i didn't put links to everything i found but it is legit the info i put, and yes i know specs change and rumors happen , its always going to be like that but facts that are done by a third part other than device makers are usually pretty accurate sources and wen you think about it , 3rd party sources aare alot more honest than the device makers at times because they would at least tell you the things that the device makers don, t want to tell you: http://kyokojap.myweb.hinet.net/gpu_gflops/..look at his link..this is one of the places i get my info from.. you mean to tell me this isn't a valid source? i seen sources in other articles in wikipedia that come from third parties and they aren't even all linked or sourced but they're accurate..i don't deserve to be suspended just because i want to make an article as fleshed out and specific as possible especially when the stuff i put in there is mostly if not all accurate, imean for god sakes some articles even tell you the performance of a device...and i'm not sure if it could be used as a source but theres even articles in wikipedia that back up my claims, now not everything in wiki is going to match cause well people make errors that's when you have to use your head and calculate..fill in the blanks if you will, and i already gave an example of this..so please take away this silly suspension and let me edit peacefully, i know i haveto source as much as i can but i'm trying, im sourcing as much as i can and yes it is time consuming and i dedicate myself to editing..now if i was trolling or doing bad things than yes i would happily blame myself but imnot being disruptive at all , jsut because others have different ways of doing things and just because i can be more thorough than others doesn't men that other admins have to abuse their authority because they didn't figure it out themselves so it seems more like a personal attack than me actually doing things wrong...i mean my work speaks for itself...i put info thats correct or pretty close to it and i also am trying to source the websites i get this info from..look for yourself if you are persistent and smart enough 1 can find out as much about something if they search for it and at times doing a little thinking n math n piecing things together helps too..it not a guess or made up when a times i try to piece things together its actually fact all you gotta to at times is just figure it out..i contributed enough in wiki and i don't know what the requirements are but i don't want to be harrassed like this anymore, being judged because i can figure out things better than some can..that is harrassment so what can i do to be an admin myself? take away my suspension and let me show you how accurate and detailed i make my edits which i know for a fact others don't make the same effort and its likely the ones who complain about it its because of personal envy that they din;t do it themselves so they abuse their power just because others are more dedicated..i noticed articles that i edit that i put facts in there that werent there before i edit them and others have built upon my contributions to make it better, used my edits to help their own now i'm not trying to take full credit because we all do our part but i don't want to be labeled DISRUPTIVE when in fact i'm actually making the article even better..you have editors who are also admins that think its fine to have very little to know specs in articles, that is just wrong and they haven't improved it...i have i filled in the blanks they have't and what do they do? they revert it back to simple and blank sections in articles..does that look right to you? of course not, so i know for a fact this is personal, theyre' reverting not because i made a few msitakes oh no cause i i' am learning but that's not it because the truth of the matter is, my contributions despite not always putting the sources are pretty close if not correct but they're jsut so immature and envious that since they didnt' figure out themselves they get upset i mean how you gonna have ab article that for example has A B F H I L , has missing facts and i fill in the blanks because those editors didn't bothered looking up the facts and yet when i fill in the blank they revert it back to the version that is missing facts..does that make sense to you? so if you have to talk to a superior to uplift my suspension than so be it but i did nothing wrong..and i hate the term DISRUPTIVE used on me when i'm doing anything but that..i'm actually improving an article and filling the blanks WITH FACTS, taken from other sites whether its a 3rd or 1st part website so please let me edit because i contributed here and did hings many editors despite their experience here, haven't bothered to look up or figure out themselves... look up my latest contribution and tell me if what you think i'm doing is so called disruptive or vandalism...im actually improving it by putting out as much facts about it as possible..little by little...you have these editors have the articles with blanks for example having some devices say that it doesn't support storage media when in fact it does.the editor didn't even bothered to look it up, they just put that it didnt't when in fact the deice actually supports it..and i'm doing the 1 getting being disruptive or doing it wrong? and yet you have editors who don't bother looking up the facts, leaving blank spaces or not wanting to figure out the specs is just unacceptable...just because you're an admin it means you have the right to mess up and the ones who are very dedicated to finding out facts are the 1s being disruptive ? are you kidding me? do the right thing uplift my suspension and make me an admin if you have to to keep others from abusing their authority , i would never do that to someone who is contributing to make the article better, i would actually appreciate he or she took the time to find out and make it as specifically and accurate as possible...i'm not asking for a medal but i feel like the things i'm doing i'm not being credited for or others are taking my credit for things i done when others haven't ..i don't deserve this treatment..just because other who aren't admins are more capable and dedicated doesn't mean you have to abuse your power because you are envious of them because you didn't figure it our or thought of it yourself... 71.172.52.70 ( talk) 16:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)and yes i know i have a few typos but that's ok 71.172.52.70 ( talk) 16:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC) 1more thing: look at this this is the version of the article from the 1 who suspended me : https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=History_of_video_game_consoles_(eighth_generation)&oldid=685534613...tell me if you see a big difference between his version and mine; https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=History_of_video_game_consoles_(eighth_generation)&oldid=685519785 now the memory clock speeds of the main consoles (x1,PS4,Wiiu) I put that there along time ago when no one lse has bothered to and other details in that article and thers i have done it and others built upon it...now look closely att he microconsole section in my version comapred to his...in his he has alot of things missing in mine i actually went to 1st n 3rd part websites n with a little thinking and figured all this stuff out myself and ofcourse looked up the facts in other websites...i mean the info matches even some articles here i mean i dont understand what the problem is when i'm actually doing the better job here, how the hell can he think doing a half assed job with errors be better than one that is more detailed and accurate just because he didn't bothered looking it up or figuring it out on his or her own hmm? like i said this is more than just an error correcting it seems more like a personal thing to me from some envious 42 year old man..if he was the one who went through all this trouble to look up the info, fill in the blanks with a little thinking and problem solving he wouldn't say anything lol but since he din't he uses and abuses his power by saying its disruptive..that is ridiculous on so many levels and totally untrue..ilike i said before i;m learning and yes i'll try to cite and get links or sources as much as i can but as you can see by the links i put here well i know how to find out facts about something as best as i can...as you can see my contributions and work speeks for itself...so i made a few mistakes in the past , we all have its completely normal to make mistakes but theres adifferenc between making mistakes and being disruptive to purposely mess up an article..i would never do that because this is 1 of my favorite websites i come here pretty often to look up information and its wonderful that anyone can contribute but i also know that also anyone can purposely vandalize or mess up on purpose..im not those people, take my edits seriously and i did enough contributions here that i can tell the stuff i put has helped others because the ones who appreciate my efforts are the 1s who built upon it and don't erase it because its correct..just because some1 does edits in a mor lazy and half assed way doesn't mean they have to abuse their power as admins just because they couldn't do it themselves..thats childish and immature and unjust...i'm sure theres many who would agree with me on this and i know the ones who don't aree are probably the ones who have the same prejudice and envious mindset as the 1 or 1s who suspended me just because i want to make a more accurate and specific version of an article as opposed to a half-assed mostly blank article just because they didnt feel like doing the extra work or researching or figuring out piecing things together or because they aren't knowledgeable on the subject...im tech savy so i know enough i contribute and i come to wikipedia to get information and research so im a contributor as well as a reader..do the right thing..people like me aren't disruptive just because we have different ways to edit that are more dedicated than some...we all have our ways of doing things and as long as they do it with good intentions to make the site better than they're not being disruptive its nto as if they're purposely trying to mess up an article..it because we all have ways of doing things..but 1 thing i know is that being as accurate n thorough as possible isn't bad.. 71.172.52.70 ( talk) 17:22, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ferret. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Katie talk 23:17, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Video game industry may have broken the
syntax by modifying 3 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 19:02, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Buna! Nu am inteles de ce se tot sterge pagina cu Maria Gheorghiu. Ce nu este in regula? Nu se poate sa-mi corectezi eventualele greseli in loc sa tot stergi pagina? Incerc sa fac tot ce pot, dar nu stiu foarte bine. Cred ca ai putea sa ajuti, in loc sa tot stergi de atatea ori... — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndaVeronica29 ( talk • contribs) 14:14, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
"Hey! I did not understand why all Delete page Maria Gheorghiu . What is wrong ? Can not my place to correct mistakes in all Delete page ? I try to do my best , but I do not know very well . I guess you could to help, instead of deleting all so many times .."
Hey! I did everything the best I could and tried to respect the rules. I do not understand why everything is deleted page. Instead delete it all the time, you could help me to correct mistakes. Maybe not quite so big ... I reserved a lot of time to write page as well and it's bothering me all the time ... I'd rather faded a little help, a message of encouragement, not only "your page has been deleted. "Especially as Maria Gheorghiu deserve a page in English. Thank you in advance! Anda — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndaVeronica29 ( talk • contribs) 14:32, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Hey, just a friendly reminder to use User warning templates when reverting cases of clear cut vandalism like you did here, otherwise the AIV process won't work as efficiently. Thanks for your editing. — Hermionedidallthework ( talk) 20:07, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Please change the dreamcast page. You can use the data on the Japanese wiki. The 10.6 million figure is totally wrong. The total sales of the dreamcast worldwide as of 2014 are 9.13 million the source is CESA. CESA publishes a yearly annual report on world software and hardware sales in the games industry. The Japanese wiki uses this as the source. There is no business source for the 10.6 million the only source people could find was a blog.
By you blocking my changes to the Dreamcast page you are promoting bad information. Please do the right thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.45.9.125 ( talk) 06:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting WoW and warning User:Ringzntattz. I have added him to Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism Seadragon ( talk) 20:11, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Regarding to your edit in the "video game consoles"-area: where do you found that the third and fourth generation BOTH ended in 2003? This makes no sense for me, especially in the template "history of video games" below are standing other discontinue dates (1983-1995 and 1987–1999 respectively). According to the article, the 3rd generation ended with the discontinuation of the NES in 1995 and the 4th generation ended with the SNES' discontinuation in 1999 in North America, Australia and Europe.— Preceding unsigned comment added by XLight ( talk • contribs) 20:09, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
[1] probably shouldn't have happened per WP:NOTBROKEN. (See also MOS:REDIR.) I'm not hard-strung up on it, just letting you know that a redirect isn't a problem. -- Izno ( talk) 15:05, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Those users should probably be reminded. ;) WP:NOTBROKE has exceptions of course (largest of which is navboxes; second largest of which is probably certain/most/all template redirects).
Regarding the location of the page, of course I was involved (I've been here a while...). The use of AoS on SC gets to the fact that SC is what made the genre popular and hence brought about its original name, "AoS" ("Aeon of Strife", the fictional Protoss civil war). -- Izno ( talk) 15:19, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
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)
17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ferret,
Your revert makes sense. I haven't played the game so I'm trying to stay away as much as possible from the article. I used ctrl-f for the names and didn't see them, but shouldn't the name of the player character's spouse be mentioned on the article on Fallout 4? -- Soetermans. T / C 16:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC) Soetermans. T / C 16:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
I suppose I get that Spring can be confusing to those in the southern hemisphere, but why then did Blizzard put their release date range as 'Spring 2016'? If that is what the publisher releases to the public, I feel that is what we should put.
CoruscantHero ( talk) 05:57, 2 December 2015 (UTC)CoruscantHero
Re [2] I honestly think you are being harsh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.216.44.188 ( talk) 19:12, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
why are you removing all my edits?
Like Gnome ISN'T the default UI used in SteamOS. It has to be specially enabled. that makes it NOT the default.
the list goes on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshmnz ( talk • contribs) 09:35, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Don't like the truth? Well those where comments about info that was missing from the article! You don't know hearthstone is a simplified mtg? WELL? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ertttttttt ( talk • contribs) 23:23, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
I left a message on the talk page regarding my deletion of Fallout 4 features on Creation Engine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FortyFiveBananas ( talk • contribs) 18:45, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
What was your problem with my Star Wars edit. You said you had a problem with me removing context for the Star Wars celebration however the only thing I removed in that regard was a sentence stating that " In late March 2015, it was revealed that the game would be shown at Star Wars Celebration 2015 in Anaheim, California." this is just an announcement of an announcement and while it would of been useful before the Celebration, the fact that we then list that it was shown at the celebration makes the sentence redundant. -- Deathawk ( talk) 00:53, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
In response to your comment on Salv's talk page, for what its worth, if I had the ability to just designate Admins, I'd make you one. If you ever did want to run for being an admin, I'd help/nominate, but...please don't let me talk you into it or anything. Its a completely nerve-wracking process, and I'd feel absolutely terrible if I talked you into it, and then it went terribly and the community was really hard on you for it. As I've said before, had I failed my AFD RFA, I don't know what I'd have done. I'd be pretty crushed if the community generally believed, "You know what, Serge, we disapprove of the manner that you volunteer your time so strongly that we collectively are rejecting you."
Anyways, my point is, I'd support you if you ever needed it, though I don't especially recommend it to anyone, because its a rough process, if that makes sense. So its more of a compliment than a suggestion, you know? Sergecross73 msg me 16:32, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
had I failed my AFD, I don't what I'd have done.-- Izno ( talk) 16:47, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Haha. I appreciate it. I've read through RFA a few times, and paid attention for a while to the recent RFCs about RFA, and it's just a brutal process that I don't feel like subjecting myself to.... yet. I've had too many self-conscious fumbles or policy misreads (Or perhaps too strict of a read) in just the last year to let anyone deliberately spend hours picking at me ;) And there's eddies of Wiki politics that I have only just barely brushed, such as deletionists versus inclusionists and the like. -- ferret ( talk) 17:08, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Can you define sourced content?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.129.96.253 ( talk) 23:42, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ferret,
After your revert, I suddenly noticed that pretty much every reception box has the aggregated reviews like (PS4) 86%, (PC) 84%, etc. Now I'm thinking, isn't this a bit odd? Since parentheses are used to note that it is something in addition to, or separate from the rest, we usually use parentheses at the end of a sentence or an entry. I don't think that any reader will be confused if it says (PS4) 86%, but shouldn't it either be 86% (PS4) or PS4: 86%? -- Soetermans. T / C 14:09, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I added a Star Wars: The Force Awakens edit about a Poster Spy design contest, you said there is no proof it's a reasonably important contest. It's an official Disney contest and was judged by Anthony Daniels. I feel that's pretty significant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editorofthepedia2015 ( talk • contribs) 11:12, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ferret, I'm just notifying you that on Aziz Sancar I reverted three IP-edits in a row that were previously patrolled by you. The IP removed sourced material, in this case the statement that Sancar's parents were Arabic-speaking. The IP gave another source which however doesn't contradict. It seems to be no more than a truth that Turkish nationalists cannot bear: that one of them, even more so the first Turkish Nobel Price Laureate, might have Arab origins, or at least parents who spoke Arabic. Following the debate about Sancar allegedly being a Kurd, this is now the second controversy that keeps IP running with their heads aginst the wall again and again. That's why we're patrolling the page, and might have to semi-protect it, if this gets worse. Just wanted to make sure yo're warned, too, for the next similyr IP edit. Regards, -- PanchoS ( talk) 14:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Moved to article's talk page. -- ferret ( talk) 15:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi
Ferret - Regarding creation stats, would it be appropriate during an RfA to note cases of essentially starting an article, but not having credit as the original creator? My immediate example is that I "created" the current Fallout 4 article, but it already existed as a redirect at the time. Should I note "creations" that are not visible from a stats perspective?
- many serious RfA voters will look into cases such as this, however it would ideally be the job of your nominator to make the voters aware of the less than blatantly obvious, such as the creations we're talking about
--
samtar
whisper
12:57, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
I've worked some of this into my user page. It's hard to comb back over your contributions and attempt to remember every place you've spent some time. :) I included most of what I considered particularly notable. It's less than I might have hoped, but as I primarily patrol, I understand why. I'll look for some more opportunities to create. I also did my first GA review today, and will see about doing more work in that area. -- ferret ( talk) 22:02, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
I have been trying to talk to ScrapIron, but he only talked to me by edit summaries and warnings until finally giving me that 'prepare to be edited' thing that I linked. I've restored the list of writers because it is too long to go in the infobox. -- 211.30.17.74 ( talk) 00:04, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Regarding your revert to my edit on December 22 Line 26: * 1928 - First Indonesian Woman Congress held in Yogyakarta, the foundation of Mother's Day in Indonesia where you mentioned that you cannot verify Mother's Day because it is in Holiday Section, I would like to explain that the Mother's Day in Indonesia is pretty much different with the Mother's Day US. We celebrate it as the day of women right movement during Dutch colonial era, initiated with the Congress in 1928. Later, our President Soekarno established it as Hari Ibu Nasional (National Mother's Day) in 1953, during the 25th celebration of the Congress. It is a national day, but practically not a holiday at all. Please return my entry so such important event may include in Wikipedia. Thank you. Ciput ( talk) 11:55, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
No, it is not about Gerwani which is a communist-influenced women activist group disbanded by new government under Suharto in 1965. You may be confused with Kowani (Kongres Wanita Indonesia, Indonesian Women Congress) which is established as "organisation" later after the 1928 Congress. You may also check their website http://kowani.or.id/ since the valid reference is relatively rare in English. And I started to post it in Wikipedia Bahasa Indonesia. Thank you. Ciput ( talk) 03:22, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Since Dragon Age: Inquisition and Shadows of Mordor also have below a 90 on metacritic, should they be changed as well? Just asking since I am not 100% positive on how critical acclaim vs. positive is perceived on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JustObserver ( talk • contribs) 17:32, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Happy to talk, however please revert your own edit, to restore to status quo before the 3rr breach. Springnuts ( talk) 00:44, 27 December 2015 (UTC) Springnuts ( talk) 00:44, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ferret, I´m sorry if one of the edits came off as peacocky. I was trying to let it shine through that Dishonored did in fact receive critical acclaim (91 PC-version on metacritic as a direct quote, over 90% on GameRankings as an indirect fortification), a fact that I feel is under-represented within the article. In fact (no pun intended), I edited it to “praise” in the first place to combine both the aspect of it being in the strange position of having received both critical acclaim and generally positive reviews and being quotable as such. Since you deleted the “praise” and all the correlating sentences, I´m lead to believe this is a very factual article, using the quotable “generally positive” from metacritic to justify the text in the intro and the “reception”-part.
However, this begs the question why at least the “critical acclaim” on metacritic is not represented anywhere in the article in written-out form, all while the “generally positive”-phrase is even used in the introduction of the page.
I understand why the “praise” was deleted on that approach, yet I don´t understand how the quotable “critical acclaim” has met the same fate? If the article would have a factual continuity, shouldn´t “generally positive” and “critical acclaim” both be featured separated by a “/ Slash” since both are very much empirical? So why was that edited out? Just to explain my point a bit better with a more plastic example: If I would ask three groups (consisting of, let´s say, respectively 10 persons) with the same level of validity to review a videogame and two groups came to a mixed and one group to a positive response, how would it be legitimate to only mention the two “mixed” group-conclusions and mention their results in the intro/review part of my website while leaving the last group hanging? This would be inadvertent distortion to some extent.
So this is quite the same problem I have with this article; while it´s well written and features a lot of quotes, why is one aspect of the critical response featured throughout all of the article in written out form, while another tremendously important aspect of critical response of just the same level of validity is left without a written-out form? Why shouldn´t both not just be separated with a “/ Slash”? Why was this last edit deleted since it was, in that respect, a factual edit with a valid basis on a legitimate score provided by the website the “generally positive” used throughout the article is based on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autorefiller ( talk • contribs) 08:09, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
I am thinking about clarifying this one guideline because I cannot seem to understand the meaning of "value" at all. I mean..."How can you all manage to understand what it is trying to mean?". Does "not adding value" mean "It does not belong here.", or does it mean "It is not at all important."?
My point is that I want to know what it means and how I can clarify it on that page of guidelines. I have a feeling that value is an important word but cannot quite work out what it means, so can we edit the guideline so that no one else would misinterpret it? Thank you.
Gamingforfun365
(talk)
02:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Rise of the Tomb Raider shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. J♯m ( talk | contribs) 20:51, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Jsharpminor: Normally I wouldn't but I feel a need to defend just a bit. The first edit I reverted introduced some OR and put Microsoft as a developer, which is wrong and needed to be undone. He then put it as publisher, and I reverted and posted to his talk. He repeated this once more, and I reverted (Third over all, second regarding publisher), and left another (warning based) message. I'm aware of 3RR and made sure I stopped at this point, and approached an admin (@ Sergecross73) to take a look, staying out of it further. Kvally ultimately self-reverted. As for the actual content in question, I'll reply at the article. -- ferret ( talk) 21:55, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
See source. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) ( talk) 17:12, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I made some edits to the Left 4 Dead 2 article, which you reverted. I'd like to work together to get that information back into the article, as it's an important facet of the current state of the game on the PC. What is it about the article that you didn't care for or that I can improve? ZeroShadows ( talk) 03:10, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
I feel that my edit on the "Book of Mormon" page was constructive and does not violate wikipedia terms. I would like to work with you to add in this section.
Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.231.191.88 ( talk) 19:18, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Would you kindly fix the other broken section redirects then? — Dispenser 22:13, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello Ferret. I've noticed how active you are working on video game articles. I was hoping you'd consider accepting an invitation to join StrategyWiki. We're a friendly wiki community focused strictly on video games, and we could really use someone with your acumen and attention to detail to help around the site. We'd be very grateful for your contributions. Hope to see you there. Plotor ( talk) 01:53, 28 January 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plotor ( talk • contribs)
Just noticing you were the last one to edit the redirect at The Elder Scrolls VI: Argonia and I wanted to get a second opinion. Is there any reason for this page still to exist? It lines up with some of the reasons for deleting anyways. This title was a complete rumor in the first place. Idealist343 ( talk) 01:21, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Ferret, this is Kiesel Guitars..... Stop redirecting our page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.28.164.179 ( talk) 17:27, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for splitting the pages (carvin and kiesel) please stop adding or changing the info for what is current on the pages, carvin can no longer manufacture musical instruments.
The past is fine, but the category links at the bottom should not have anything to do with instruments - period.... They no longer make instruments — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.28.164.179 ( talk) 17:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
The Kiesel Guitars page needs to go back to what we had... It has nothing to do with Carvin Corporation. Stop altering our page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.28.164.179 ( talk) 18:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Looking at the page from my phone, I see you are right, the original caption was correct. But, load the page on a 1366x768 display, and the centre picture (the S model) is displayed on the left while the right one (the E model) is displayed below the first two, in the middle. This may create some confusion if a reader isn't familiar with the consoles. Tesla ( talk) 00:17, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Hey do you think you could help me with my page? I can't code from scratch very well.-- kody1492 Talk 16:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Where does it say that this information isn't supposed to be non-English release dates included. Sounds like this is pretty egregious ignorance of Global perspective.-- Prisencolin ( talk) 20:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
7&6=thirteen (
☎) has given you a
Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{ subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. |
7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 15:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Space Run you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Jaguar --
Jaguar (
talk)
13:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
The article
Space Run you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Space Run for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Jaguar --
Jaguar (
talk)
19:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
The article
Space Run you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Space Run for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Jaguar --
Jaguar (
talk)
20:21, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm a newbie at wikipedia so please excuse that. I do not want to violate the terms of service. Sorry. -MCPE FAN — Preceding unsigned comment added by MCPE FAN ( talk • contribs) 23:31, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Hey Ferrit... Sorry I was only changing the elder scrolls thing to mess with my friend... i was gonna change it back immediately— Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.39.250.242 ( talk) 20:12, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Would it be fair to include a "Yes, but to an extent", and include a footnote mentioning that much newer software can't run if the hardware doesn't support required features? Wikinium ( talk) 18:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Current revision of that article looks fine to me, kudos to you and the other editors for bringing that spat to a consensus. Breadblade ( talk) 06:29, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:17, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, but you are wrong about this, gamindustry IS NOT source of numbers, blog from SuperData (which is completely unreliable source) is THE source.
90.144.32.15 ( talk) 16:58, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Nonsense, im reporting you. Random blogs arent reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.144.32.15 ( talk • contribs) 17:01, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Superdata is one in line of internet analysts who demonstrated on many occasions on such blogs how wrong their numbers are becuse their numbers were compared to existibg official numbers. And in this it is just someones BLOG from there.
If you can get OFFICIAL verification of those numbers be my guest and revert it, until then remove them from wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.144.32.15 ( talk) 17:09, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Along with any other info cosisting any of superdatas numbers. They are NOT reliable source, no matter which media passes their blogs on.
90.144.32.15 ( talk) 17:12, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
You will be reported too if you keep reverting this 90.144.32.15 ( talk) 06:54, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
From WP:VG/RS "This list is neither complete nor can it be used as definitive proof regarding a listed source's reliability determination" 90.144.32.15 ( talk) 07:05, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
And MORE "Articles related to video games need reliable sources like any other Wikipedia article—content must be verifiable" 90.144.32.15 ( talk) 07:09, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Reports incoming 5.39.157.198 ( talk) 19:24, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
I added Android to the list of platforms on the Half-Life (series) page and you reverted it for some reason. Half-Life 2 runs on Android (NVIDIA Shield devices) natively so that is an incorrect reversion. I have fixed it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pacnet ( talk • contribs) 21:08, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
If i Cant send you link i thought you should see it in you tube that they have hardcore punk and mathcore in them just look at Howord jones vs jessie leach vocal battle if you don"t believe me just check out the 1999 demo"s then hopefully you see my point and provided sorces Jg9443 ( talk) 22:14, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
I am trying to prove that they are in the punk rock lead just for example rise against is an american punk rock band Jg9443 ( talk) 17:47, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Yet again i am going to give evidence but diffrent big and juicy something you cannot denied i am going to give the websit the source and the link of the video that they say that they are punk rock just give me little while and latter you"l know what is their main lead genre. Jg9443 ( talk) 18:00, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
OK i put melodic hardcore in my page if you change it to rise against is a Chicago punk rock band instead of rise against is a american melodic hardocore band you scratch my back i"ll scratch yours. Jg9443 ( talk) 23:13, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
OK i put melodic hardcore in my page if you change it to rise against is a Chicago punk rock band instead of rise against is a american melodic hardocore band you scratch my back i"ll scratch yours. Jg9443 ( talk) 23:14, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Sorry i did not no but that does not give you the right to change my page to rise against is a Chicago punk rock band and i gave the the information i had the evidence. Jg9443 ( talk) 00:12, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
By the way the last time i checked punk rock is a genre and one question strike annywere is melodic hardocre why cant you put that there ? Jg9443 ( talk) 00:31, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Just to be easy just to serge to change it please i am also getting tired of this but i will not quit. Jg9443 ( talk) 14:40, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
I just saw this. What the... Thanks for reverting. -- Soetermans. T / C 08:40, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
So. Maybe add this tittle in new section "Authentication reiquired in past" with descrption "released on GOG"? Eurohunter ( talk) 19:20, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Just because you say there's a consensus, doesn't make it so. Also you have no proof there's any connection between me and the other IP. Unless you're a checkuser, you can't make that allegation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.216.79.210 ( talk) 22:33, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
I reverted your change since both titles are different products as their name indicate. As Nintendo state on its website, "Skylanders SuperChargers Racing for the Wii and 3DS: Fans can augment their SuperCharger experience with a complementary, dedicated racing combat game -- Skylanders SuperChargers Racing -- for the Wii™ system and Nintendo 3DS™ hand-held system. All-new tracks, augmented with power-ups, boosts, hazards and more, offer up to 50 different and exciting gameplay experiences. On Nintendo 3DS, gamers can go head-to-head with competitive multiplayer via local play or online with up to four players. Iconic Nintendo character Bowser™ and his Sky vehicle, Clown Cruiser are available in the Skylanders SuperChargers Racing Starter Packs for Wii and Nintendo 3DS and can also be played on the Wii U™ system. The Supercharged character not only works in Skylanders SuperChargers Racing, but also as amiibo in compatible Nintendo games, so players can store their saved data in both modes with a simple twist of the figure's base.". Also, Maxime Montcalm, the game director of Skylanders SuperChargers Racing explains in an interview with GamerGen (in French) why this game isn't a port: "Le porter à partir de la PS4, c'est un gros défi, alors le porter sur Wii, personne n'était capable de faire un jeu d'une qualité semblable à la PS4 et la Xbox One. Donc quand on nous a demandé de faire un épisode Wii, on a tout de suite décidé d'en faire notre projet."
Also, Guha Bala, president of Vicarious Visions, confirmed in an interview FamilyGamer TV, that Beenox helped develop Skylanders SuperChargers (race tracks, power-ups). Nintendo Life states "Beenox, which is responsible for the Wii and 3DS games, has also contributed these Kart Racing modes to the main Wii U (and PlayStation and Xbox) experience.". Facteur Geek, upon visiting Beenox during the game launch, confirmed this was well (in French): "Le mode aventure fut développé en grande partie par l’équipe de Vicarious Visions, studio d’Activision alors que le studio de Québec Beenox, quant à lui, s’est attaqué à la partie course qui est très présente dans le titre. C’est donc dire que la version Wii et 3DS sont les bébés du studio car elle ne possède que le mode course.". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Francois Taddei ( talk • contribs) 23:25, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for letting me know. Yes I own the site but I'm trying to add the news whichever is new or not yet added, please do check i'm not trying to add anything unnecessary.
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sohelmoldhariya ( talk • contribs) 20:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I own the website that's correct but as you noticed all the info which I linked was legit and was related to the topic. if you think it's wrong please let me know. I post latest news related to anime, so just trying to update news and also link it to wiki.\
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sohelmoldhariya ( talk • contribs) 20:29, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you and here I have a news and it's confirmed and also mentioned in WIKIA of Dragon Ball Super. https://otakukart.com/otakublog/anime/super-saiyan-blue-female-whis-s-real-names-champa-s-identity-revealed and not yet posted anywhere else — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sohelmoldhariya ( talk • contribs) 20:56, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
i have been using wikipedia for years and everyone has their own way of editing, i have made contributions here that i know for a fact that before i put them no one in said article has, i'm not a pro at editing and or citing the sources cause well i'm not here 24/7 but i do contribute and i don't just make stufff up, i look up the info from places and websites and just because you don't see all the facts in 1 area doesn't mean you cant find them elsewhere, now regarding articles some articles in here in wikipeidia can also be used as sources, i don't see why sources within wikipedia can't also be used because they were put there by other who sourced it, now i see some atcles that have some parts sourced, others they don't have everything sourced and yet the info is still there, even though some information isn't linked doesn't mean that its not true or doesn't exit, i actually plan to source as much as i can but i'm not a pro here, no one has told me how to edit, i learned all this from seeing others edit, the coding in how to extend title boxes etc etc, i learned from what others have done...and its unfair that i'm being suspended because i try to make everything as accurate as possible, trust me i know the information i put isn't made up but its sourced, i just got to put it there where i get it from, i rememeber putting information on articles that no one has bothered to look up and since i put them people have used it and built on that, no one else has done it before me, and the information is correct but no one made the effort to look it up...I DID ;/ ...and i'm being suspended fojust because i'm thorough and want to make the best articlee as i can, if that's the case why don't you just let users make their ow version of articles for their own personal use..i thought we were all suppose to work together here..and i do not , i repeat do not make up facts, everything i put is what i have seen from websites , i might not have been able to put links to all of them but no one has taught how to do things here, i learned all this myself from other editors works.. no one is born knowing everything, the way i do my contributions is as thorough and specific as possible because i blieve it makes it easier for people to know exactly what said article specifications are, yes we all don't get it erfect but i look up the information , there's many wbebsites i get my sources from, credible websites, it doesn't always have to be the websites from the creators of said device because lets be honest some device makers don't reveal their devices full specs always because they don't want the tech-savy and more intelligent consumers to know cause they know how to decide which is better, im that type , i dont just buy things and not knowing their capabilities or features, i don't understand how some editors revert back to a simple article that btw is missing facts, so basically its a bunch of boxes with little to no information on them cause those editors were too lazy to look up the information, there r many articles n websites that hjave detailed specs of devices , just because the device maker doesn't put them because they're afraid of the competition would outdo them in specs or users to pick the more powerful or most featured device doesn't mean we all don't have the right to know the full feature set of a device, i got all this information from legit articles for example look at this one, some of the information here is sourced from wiki itself , meaning the same info that its in some of these SOC's is that's in other articles here and they match, now regarding facts about clock speeds and performance if a same model GPU for example runs at 600 MHz with a flop count of 600 gflops and another of the same model or family but clocked higher at 700 mhz then its common sense to figure out that for each 100mhz speed it adds 100 gflops even though its not mentioned there in the article because someone didn't fill it out, if it has the same specs but different clock speeds or cores than its not heard to piece 2 and 2 together..do you really need to be told what X means in 2 + X = 5? no because we can just figure this out on our own, maybe the device maker didnt put it there to avoid competetion , maybe they forgot to put it , but the truth of the matter is that some things you can figure it out if you have the smarts for it..some of these articlesi see online besides the ones in wiki go into detail about all the internals or specs of a device but ofocoruse the device maker wont always tell you exactly what all the features specifically for obvious competition reasons.. i mean theres formulas to calculate flops and they vary depending the type of graphics architecture etc...take a look at this article..its def not posted by the device makers but the information there is accurate because it was gathered by other articles but also form people who prob also tested the performance of devices, well in this case GPU performance...the WII U was never told by nintendo its CPU clock speed because they know that people would compare it unfavorably to the competition but the truth is even if your device is inferior you shouldn't hide the facts of its specs which is why some users actually took the device apart and tested the CPU cpeed of the Wii u to get its clock count, nintendo or ibm never wnet into detailed about because they know the PS4 and X1 would outperform it by several times, just because the device maker doesn't post the full specs doesn't mean others wont figure it out test the hardware, the only reason why we found out the gpu clock speed of the wii u is at 1.24 ghz was because someone took it apart and tested it...they did tests, calculate, etc to come out with the specs, they didn't just make them up, now i know articles posted by people who havent made the devices make mistakes , i mean we re human we all make make mistakes but even the device makers make mistakes as well but the truth of the matter is that most information about a device is usually correct and i see many articles here that doesnt have every single detail sourced yet its there because they didnt put it in there i mean can you imagine an article that has lots of details but has every couple of words sourced i mean, having sources is good but u can get alot of information about a device from 1 article at least but ofocurse its good to put as many as possible that has the specs to match the sources, i didn't put links to everything i found but it is legit the info i put, and yes i know specs change and rumors happen , its always going to be like that but facts that are done by a third part other than device makers are usually pretty accurate sources and wen you think about it , 3rd party sources aare alot more honest than the device makers at times because they would at least tell you the things that the device makers don, t want to tell you: http://kyokojap.myweb.hinet.net/gpu_gflops/..look at his link..this is one of the places i get my info from.. you mean to tell me this isn't a valid source? i seen sources in other articles in wikipedia that come from third parties and they aren't even all linked or sourced but they're accurate..i don't deserve to be suspended just because i want to make an article as fleshed out and specific as possible especially when the stuff i put in there is mostly if not all accurate, imean for god sakes some articles even tell you the performance of a device...and i'm not sure if it could be used as a source but theres even articles in wikipedia that back up my claims, now not everything in wiki is going to match cause well people make errors that's when you have to use your head and calculate..fill in the blanks if you will, and i already gave an example of this..so please take away this silly suspension and let me edit peacefully, i know i haveto source as much as i can but i'm trying, im sourcing as much as i can and yes it is time consuming and i dedicate myself to editing..now if i was trolling or doing bad things than yes i would happily blame myself but imnot being disruptive at all , jsut because others have different ways of doing things and just because i can be more thorough than others doesn't men that other admins have to abuse their authority because they didn't figure it out themselves so it seems more like a personal attack than me actually doing things wrong...i mean my work speaks for itself...i put info thats correct or pretty close to it and i also am trying to source the websites i get this info from..look for yourself if you are persistent and smart enough 1 can find out as much about something if they search for it and at times doing a little thinking n math n piecing things together helps too..it not a guess or made up when a times i try to piece things together its actually fact all you gotta to at times is just figure it out..i contributed enough in wiki and i don't know what the requirements are but i don't want to be harrassed like this anymore, being judged because i can figure out things better than some can..that is harrassment so what can i do to be an admin myself? take away my suspension and let me show you how accurate and detailed i make my edits which i know for a fact others don't make the same effort and its likely the ones who complain about it its because of personal envy that they din;t do it themselves so they abuse their power just because others are more dedicated..i noticed articles that i edit that i put facts in there that werent there before i edit them and others have built upon my contributions to make it better, used my edits to help their own now i'm not trying to take full credit because we all do our part but i don't want to be labeled DISRUPTIVE when in fact i'm actually making the article even better..you have editors who are also admins that think its fine to have very little to know specs in articles, that is just wrong and they haven't improved it...i have i filled in the blanks they have't and what do they do? they revert it back to simple and blank sections in articles..does that look right to you? of course not, so i know for a fact this is personal, theyre' reverting not because i made a few msitakes oh no cause i i' am learning but that's not it because the truth of the matter is, my contributions despite not always putting the sources are pretty close if not correct but they're jsut so immature and envious that since they didnt' figure out themselves they get upset i mean how you gonna have ab article that for example has A B F H I L , has missing facts and i fill in the blanks because those editors didn't bothered looking up the facts and yet when i fill in the blank they revert it back to the version that is missing facts..does that make sense to you? so if you have to talk to a superior to uplift my suspension than so be it but i did nothing wrong..and i hate the term DISRUPTIVE used on me when i'm doing anything but that..i'm actually improving an article and filling the blanks WITH FACTS, taken from other sites whether its a 3rd or 1st part website so please let me edit because i contributed here and did hings many editors despite their experience here, haven't bothered to look up or figure out themselves... look up my latest contribution and tell me if what you think i'm doing is so called disruptive or vandalism...im actually improving it by putting out as much facts about it as possible..little by little...you have these editors have the articles with blanks for example having some devices say that it doesn't support storage media when in fact it does.the editor didn't even bothered to look it up, they just put that it didnt't when in fact the deice actually supports it..and i'm doing the 1 getting being disruptive or doing it wrong? and yet you have editors who don't bother looking up the facts, leaving blank spaces or not wanting to figure out the specs is just unacceptable...just because you're an admin it means you have the right to mess up and the ones who are very dedicated to finding out facts are the 1s being disruptive ? are you kidding me? do the right thing uplift my suspension and make me an admin if you have to to keep others from abusing their authority , i would never do that to someone who is contributing to make the article better, i would actually appreciate he or she took the time to find out and make it as specifically and accurate as possible...i'm not asking for a medal but i feel like the things i'm doing i'm not being credited for or others are taking my credit for things i done when others haven't ..i don't deserve this treatment..just because other who aren't admins are more capable and dedicated doesn't mean you have to abuse your power because you are envious of them because you didn't figure it our or thought of it yourself... 71.172.52.70 ( talk) 16:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)and yes i know i have a few typos but that's ok 71.172.52.70 ( talk) 16:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC) 1more thing: look at this this is the version of the article from the 1 who suspended me : https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=History_of_video_game_consoles_(eighth_generation)&oldid=685534613...tell me if you see a big difference between his version and mine; https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=History_of_video_game_consoles_(eighth_generation)&oldid=685519785 now the memory clock speeds of the main consoles (x1,PS4,Wiiu) I put that there along time ago when no one lse has bothered to and other details in that article and thers i have done it and others built upon it...now look closely att he microconsole section in my version comapred to his...in his he has alot of things missing in mine i actually went to 1st n 3rd part websites n with a little thinking and figured all this stuff out myself and ofcourse looked up the facts in other websites...i mean the info matches even some articles here i mean i dont understand what the problem is when i'm actually doing the better job here, how the hell can he think doing a half assed job with errors be better than one that is more detailed and accurate just because he didn't bothered looking it up or figuring it out on his or her own hmm? like i said this is more than just an error correcting it seems more like a personal thing to me from some envious 42 year old man..if he was the one who went through all this trouble to look up the info, fill in the blanks with a little thinking and problem solving he wouldn't say anything lol but since he din't he uses and abuses his power by saying its disruptive..that is ridiculous on so many levels and totally untrue..ilike i said before i;m learning and yes i'll try to cite and get links or sources as much as i can but as you can see by the links i put here well i know how to find out facts about something as best as i can...as you can see my contributions and work speeks for itself...so i made a few mistakes in the past , we all have its completely normal to make mistakes but theres adifferenc between making mistakes and being disruptive to purposely mess up an article..i would never do that because this is 1 of my favorite websites i come here pretty often to look up information and its wonderful that anyone can contribute but i also know that also anyone can purposely vandalize or mess up on purpose..im not those people, take my edits seriously and i did enough contributions here that i can tell the stuff i put has helped others because the ones who appreciate my efforts are the 1s who built upon it and don't erase it because its correct..just because some1 does edits in a mor lazy and half assed way doesn't mean they have to abuse their power as admins just because they couldn't do it themselves..thats childish and immature and unjust...i'm sure theres many who would agree with me on this and i know the ones who don't aree are probably the ones who have the same prejudice and envious mindset as the 1 or 1s who suspended me just because i want to make a more accurate and specific version of an article as opposed to a half-assed mostly blank article just because they didnt feel like doing the extra work or researching or figuring out piecing things together or because they aren't knowledgeable on the subject...im tech savy so i know enough i contribute and i come to wikipedia to get information and research so im a contributor as well as a reader..do the right thing..people like me aren't disruptive just because we have different ways to edit that are more dedicated than some...we all have our ways of doing things and as long as they do it with good intentions to make the site better than they're not being disruptive its nto as if they're purposely trying to mess up an article..it because we all have ways of doing things..but 1 thing i know is that being as accurate n thorough as possible isn't bad.. 71.172.52.70 ( talk) 17:22, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ferret. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Katie talk 23:17, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Video game industry may have broken the
syntax by modifying 3 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 19:02, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Buna! Nu am inteles de ce se tot sterge pagina cu Maria Gheorghiu. Ce nu este in regula? Nu se poate sa-mi corectezi eventualele greseli in loc sa tot stergi pagina? Incerc sa fac tot ce pot, dar nu stiu foarte bine. Cred ca ai putea sa ajuti, in loc sa tot stergi de atatea ori... — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndaVeronica29 ( talk • contribs) 14:14, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
"Hey! I did not understand why all Delete page Maria Gheorghiu . What is wrong ? Can not my place to correct mistakes in all Delete page ? I try to do my best , but I do not know very well . I guess you could to help, instead of deleting all so many times .."
Hey! I did everything the best I could and tried to respect the rules. I do not understand why everything is deleted page. Instead delete it all the time, you could help me to correct mistakes. Maybe not quite so big ... I reserved a lot of time to write page as well and it's bothering me all the time ... I'd rather faded a little help, a message of encouragement, not only "your page has been deleted. "Especially as Maria Gheorghiu deserve a page in English. Thank you in advance! Anda — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndaVeronica29 ( talk • contribs) 14:32, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Hey, just a friendly reminder to use User warning templates when reverting cases of clear cut vandalism like you did here, otherwise the AIV process won't work as efficiently. Thanks for your editing. — Hermionedidallthework ( talk) 20:07, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Please change the dreamcast page. You can use the data on the Japanese wiki. The 10.6 million figure is totally wrong. The total sales of the dreamcast worldwide as of 2014 are 9.13 million the source is CESA. CESA publishes a yearly annual report on world software and hardware sales in the games industry. The Japanese wiki uses this as the source. There is no business source for the 10.6 million the only source people could find was a blog.
By you blocking my changes to the Dreamcast page you are promoting bad information. Please do the right thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.45.9.125 ( talk) 06:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting WoW and warning User:Ringzntattz. I have added him to Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism Seadragon ( talk) 20:11, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Regarding to your edit in the "video game consoles"-area: where do you found that the third and fourth generation BOTH ended in 2003? This makes no sense for me, especially in the template "history of video games" below are standing other discontinue dates (1983-1995 and 1987–1999 respectively). According to the article, the 3rd generation ended with the discontinuation of the NES in 1995 and the 4th generation ended with the SNES' discontinuation in 1999 in North America, Australia and Europe.— Preceding unsigned comment added by XLight ( talk • contribs) 20:09, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
[1] probably shouldn't have happened per WP:NOTBROKEN. (See also MOS:REDIR.) I'm not hard-strung up on it, just letting you know that a redirect isn't a problem. -- Izno ( talk) 15:05, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Those users should probably be reminded. ;) WP:NOTBROKE has exceptions of course (largest of which is navboxes; second largest of which is probably certain/most/all template redirects).
Regarding the location of the page, of course I was involved (I've been here a while...). The use of AoS on SC gets to the fact that SC is what made the genre popular and hence brought about its original name, "AoS" ("Aeon of Strife", the fictional Protoss civil war). -- Izno ( talk) 15:19, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
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)
17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ferret,
Your revert makes sense. I haven't played the game so I'm trying to stay away as much as possible from the article. I used ctrl-f for the names and didn't see them, but shouldn't the name of the player character's spouse be mentioned on the article on Fallout 4? -- Soetermans. T / C 16:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC) Soetermans. T / C 16:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
I suppose I get that Spring can be confusing to those in the southern hemisphere, but why then did Blizzard put their release date range as 'Spring 2016'? If that is what the publisher releases to the public, I feel that is what we should put.
CoruscantHero ( talk) 05:57, 2 December 2015 (UTC)CoruscantHero
Re [2] I honestly think you are being harsh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.216.44.188 ( talk) 19:12, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
why are you removing all my edits?
Like Gnome ISN'T the default UI used in SteamOS. It has to be specially enabled. that makes it NOT the default.
the list goes on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshmnz ( talk • contribs) 09:35, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Don't like the truth? Well those where comments about info that was missing from the article! You don't know hearthstone is a simplified mtg? WELL? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ertttttttt ( talk • contribs) 23:23, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
I left a message on the talk page regarding my deletion of Fallout 4 features on Creation Engine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FortyFiveBananas ( talk • contribs) 18:45, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
What was your problem with my Star Wars edit. You said you had a problem with me removing context for the Star Wars celebration however the only thing I removed in that regard was a sentence stating that " In late March 2015, it was revealed that the game would be shown at Star Wars Celebration 2015 in Anaheim, California." this is just an announcement of an announcement and while it would of been useful before the Celebration, the fact that we then list that it was shown at the celebration makes the sentence redundant. -- Deathawk ( talk) 00:53, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
In response to your comment on Salv's talk page, for what its worth, if I had the ability to just designate Admins, I'd make you one. If you ever did want to run for being an admin, I'd help/nominate, but...please don't let me talk you into it or anything. Its a completely nerve-wracking process, and I'd feel absolutely terrible if I talked you into it, and then it went terribly and the community was really hard on you for it. As I've said before, had I failed my AFD RFA, I don't know what I'd have done. I'd be pretty crushed if the community generally believed, "You know what, Serge, we disapprove of the manner that you volunteer your time so strongly that we collectively are rejecting you."
Anyways, my point is, I'd support you if you ever needed it, though I don't especially recommend it to anyone, because its a rough process, if that makes sense. So its more of a compliment than a suggestion, you know? Sergecross73 msg me 16:32, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
had I failed my AFD, I don't what I'd have done.-- Izno ( talk) 16:47, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Haha. I appreciate it. I've read through RFA a few times, and paid attention for a while to the recent RFCs about RFA, and it's just a brutal process that I don't feel like subjecting myself to.... yet. I've had too many self-conscious fumbles or policy misreads (Or perhaps too strict of a read) in just the last year to let anyone deliberately spend hours picking at me ;) And there's eddies of Wiki politics that I have only just barely brushed, such as deletionists versus inclusionists and the like. -- ferret ( talk) 17:08, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Can you define sourced content?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.129.96.253 ( talk) 23:42, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ferret,
After your revert, I suddenly noticed that pretty much every reception box has the aggregated reviews like (PS4) 86%, (PC) 84%, etc. Now I'm thinking, isn't this a bit odd? Since parentheses are used to note that it is something in addition to, or separate from the rest, we usually use parentheses at the end of a sentence or an entry. I don't think that any reader will be confused if it says (PS4) 86%, but shouldn't it either be 86% (PS4) or PS4: 86%? -- Soetermans. T / C 14:09, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I added a Star Wars: The Force Awakens edit about a Poster Spy design contest, you said there is no proof it's a reasonably important contest. It's an official Disney contest and was judged by Anthony Daniels. I feel that's pretty significant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editorofthepedia2015 ( talk • contribs) 11:12, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ferret, I'm just notifying you that on Aziz Sancar I reverted three IP-edits in a row that were previously patrolled by you. The IP removed sourced material, in this case the statement that Sancar's parents were Arabic-speaking. The IP gave another source which however doesn't contradict. It seems to be no more than a truth that Turkish nationalists cannot bear: that one of them, even more so the first Turkish Nobel Price Laureate, might have Arab origins, or at least parents who spoke Arabic. Following the debate about Sancar allegedly being a Kurd, this is now the second controversy that keeps IP running with their heads aginst the wall again and again. That's why we're patrolling the page, and might have to semi-protect it, if this gets worse. Just wanted to make sure yo're warned, too, for the next similyr IP edit. Regards, -- PanchoS ( talk) 14:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Moved to article's talk page. -- ferret ( talk) 15:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi
Ferret - Regarding creation stats, would it be appropriate during an RfA to note cases of essentially starting an article, but not having credit as the original creator? My immediate example is that I "created" the current Fallout 4 article, but it already existed as a redirect at the time. Should I note "creations" that are not visible from a stats perspective?
- many serious RfA voters will look into cases such as this, however it would ideally be the job of your nominator to make the voters aware of the less than blatantly obvious, such as the creations we're talking about
--
samtar
whisper
12:57, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
I've worked some of this into my user page. It's hard to comb back over your contributions and attempt to remember every place you've spent some time. :) I included most of what I considered particularly notable. It's less than I might have hoped, but as I primarily patrol, I understand why. I'll look for some more opportunities to create. I also did my first GA review today, and will see about doing more work in that area. -- ferret ( talk) 22:02, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
I have been trying to talk to ScrapIron, but he only talked to me by edit summaries and warnings until finally giving me that 'prepare to be edited' thing that I linked. I've restored the list of writers because it is too long to go in the infobox. -- 211.30.17.74 ( talk) 00:04, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Regarding your revert to my edit on December 22 Line 26: * 1928 - First Indonesian Woman Congress held in Yogyakarta, the foundation of Mother's Day in Indonesia where you mentioned that you cannot verify Mother's Day because it is in Holiday Section, I would like to explain that the Mother's Day in Indonesia is pretty much different with the Mother's Day US. We celebrate it as the day of women right movement during Dutch colonial era, initiated with the Congress in 1928. Later, our President Soekarno established it as Hari Ibu Nasional (National Mother's Day) in 1953, during the 25th celebration of the Congress. It is a national day, but practically not a holiday at all. Please return my entry so such important event may include in Wikipedia. Thank you. Ciput ( talk) 11:55, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
No, it is not about Gerwani which is a communist-influenced women activist group disbanded by new government under Suharto in 1965. You may be confused with Kowani (Kongres Wanita Indonesia, Indonesian Women Congress) which is established as "organisation" later after the 1928 Congress. You may also check their website http://kowani.or.id/ since the valid reference is relatively rare in English. And I started to post it in Wikipedia Bahasa Indonesia. Thank you. Ciput ( talk) 03:22, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Since Dragon Age: Inquisition and Shadows of Mordor also have below a 90 on metacritic, should they be changed as well? Just asking since I am not 100% positive on how critical acclaim vs. positive is perceived on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JustObserver ( talk • contribs) 17:32, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Happy to talk, however please revert your own edit, to restore to status quo before the 3rr breach. Springnuts ( talk) 00:44, 27 December 2015 (UTC) Springnuts ( talk) 00:44, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ferret, I´m sorry if one of the edits came off as peacocky. I was trying to let it shine through that Dishonored did in fact receive critical acclaim (91 PC-version on metacritic as a direct quote, over 90% on GameRankings as an indirect fortification), a fact that I feel is under-represented within the article. In fact (no pun intended), I edited it to “praise” in the first place to combine both the aspect of it being in the strange position of having received both critical acclaim and generally positive reviews and being quotable as such. Since you deleted the “praise” and all the correlating sentences, I´m lead to believe this is a very factual article, using the quotable “generally positive” from metacritic to justify the text in the intro and the “reception”-part.
However, this begs the question why at least the “critical acclaim” on metacritic is not represented anywhere in the article in written-out form, all while the “generally positive”-phrase is even used in the introduction of the page.
I understand why the “praise” was deleted on that approach, yet I don´t understand how the quotable “critical acclaim” has met the same fate? If the article would have a factual continuity, shouldn´t “generally positive” and “critical acclaim” both be featured separated by a “/ Slash” since both are very much empirical? So why was that edited out? Just to explain my point a bit better with a more plastic example: If I would ask three groups (consisting of, let´s say, respectively 10 persons) with the same level of validity to review a videogame and two groups came to a mixed and one group to a positive response, how would it be legitimate to only mention the two “mixed” group-conclusions and mention their results in the intro/review part of my website while leaving the last group hanging? This would be inadvertent distortion to some extent.
So this is quite the same problem I have with this article; while it´s well written and features a lot of quotes, why is one aspect of the critical response featured throughout all of the article in written out form, while another tremendously important aspect of critical response of just the same level of validity is left without a written-out form? Why shouldn´t both not just be separated with a “/ Slash”? Why was this last edit deleted since it was, in that respect, a factual edit with a valid basis on a legitimate score provided by the website the “generally positive” used throughout the article is based on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autorefiller ( talk • contribs) 08:09, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
I am thinking about clarifying this one guideline because I cannot seem to understand the meaning of "value" at all. I mean..."How can you all manage to understand what it is trying to mean?". Does "not adding value" mean "It does not belong here.", or does it mean "It is not at all important."?
My point is that I want to know what it means and how I can clarify it on that page of guidelines. I have a feeling that value is an important word but cannot quite work out what it means, so can we edit the guideline so that no one else would misinterpret it? Thank you.
Gamingforfun365
(talk)
02:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Rise of the Tomb Raider shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. J♯m ( talk | contribs) 20:51, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Jsharpminor: Normally I wouldn't but I feel a need to defend just a bit. The first edit I reverted introduced some OR and put Microsoft as a developer, which is wrong and needed to be undone. He then put it as publisher, and I reverted and posted to his talk. He repeated this once more, and I reverted (Third over all, second regarding publisher), and left another (warning based) message. I'm aware of 3RR and made sure I stopped at this point, and approached an admin (@ Sergecross73) to take a look, staying out of it further. Kvally ultimately self-reverted. As for the actual content in question, I'll reply at the article. -- ferret ( talk) 21:55, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
See source. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) ( talk) 17:12, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I made some edits to the Left 4 Dead 2 article, which you reverted. I'd like to work together to get that information back into the article, as it's an important facet of the current state of the game on the PC. What is it about the article that you didn't care for or that I can improve? ZeroShadows ( talk) 03:10, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
I feel that my edit on the "Book of Mormon" page was constructive and does not violate wikipedia terms. I would like to work with you to add in this section.
Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.231.191.88 ( talk) 19:18, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Would you kindly fix the other broken section redirects then? — Dispenser 22:13, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello Ferret. I've noticed how active you are working on video game articles. I was hoping you'd consider accepting an invitation to join StrategyWiki. We're a friendly wiki community focused strictly on video games, and we could really use someone with your acumen and attention to detail to help around the site. We'd be very grateful for your contributions. Hope to see you there. Plotor ( talk) 01:53, 28 January 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plotor ( talk • contribs)
Just noticing you were the last one to edit the redirect at The Elder Scrolls VI: Argonia and I wanted to get a second opinion. Is there any reason for this page still to exist? It lines up with some of the reasons for deleting anyways. This title was a complete rumor in the first place. Idealist343 ( talk) 01:21, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Ferret, this is Kiesel Guitars..... Stop redirecting our page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.28.164.179 ( talk) 17:27, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for splitting the pages (carvin and kiesel) please stop adding or changing the info for what is current on the pages, carvin can no longer manufacture musical instruments.
The past is fine, but the category links at the bottom should not have anything to do with instruments - period.... They no longer make instruments — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.28.164.179 ( talk) 17:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
The Kiesel Guitars page needs to go back to what we had... It has nothing to do with Carvin Corporation. Stop altering our page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.28.164.179 ( talk) 18:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Looking at the page from my phone, I see you are right, the original caption was correct. But, load the page on a 1366x768 display, and the centre picture (the S model) is displayed on the left while the right one (the E model) is displayed below the first two, in the middle. This may create some confusion if a reader isn't familiar with the consoles. Tesla ( talk) 00:17, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Hey do you think you could help me with my page? I can't code from scratch very well.-- kody1492 Talk 16:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Where does it say that this information isn't supposed to be non-English release dates included. Sounds like this is pretty egregious ignorance of Global perspective.-- Prisencolin ( talk) 20:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
7&6=thirteen (
☎) has given you a
Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{ subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. |
7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 15:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Space Run you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Jaguar --
Jaguar (
talk)
13:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
The article
Space Run you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Space Run for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Jaguar --
Jaguar (
talk)
19:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
The article
Space Run you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Space Run for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Jaguar --
Jaguar (
talk)
20:21, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm a newbie at wikipedia so please excuse that. I do not want to violate the terms of service. Sorry. -MCPE FAN — Preceding unsigned comment added by MCPE FAN ( talk • contribs) 23:31, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Hey Ferrit... Sorry I was only changing the elder scrolls thing to mess with my friend... i was gonna change it back immediately— Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.39.250.242 ( talk) 20:12, 12 January 2016 (UTC)