This page 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.

2007, July Information

Would you mind popping over to List of Power Rangers: Turbo episodes and doing a copyedit for me? I just wrote the entire thing and I doubt my grammar and spelling is perfect. Would be much appreciated if you did a quick clean up for me :) --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 17:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Hey, I did a quick copyedit on the page, fixed some spelling, minor grammer and external links. Without knowing anything about the show, however, I'm somewhat limited in what I can do. Cheers! -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 19:22, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanx, just wanted to make the page look decent :) --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 19:24, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I've already rebuilt your userpage. Hope you like it. If not, simply revert my edit (don't forget about the header). Andrij Kursetsky ⊗ 20:49, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm at your service ;) Andrij Kursetsky ⊗ 14:12, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Thank you sir for catching the vandalism to my userpage. Subject vandalised again after your final warning and has been reported to WP:AIV. Cheers! -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 22:45, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey, no problem...Whack-A-Vandal is fun...anyways...Peace. Spartan- James 01:54, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this is the correct way to respond to your editing, but here goes. Regarding the Hayley Westenra edit about having "perfect pitch" and your editing comment: Undo; how is it clear? It is specifically stated as such in the book? What page in the book? Be more clear or it will be considering original research. The incident referred to in the article is described in the book Hayley Westenra: The World at Her Feet on page 25: "Hayley's class teacher came to me and said, "[...]I've never heard a child so tone true. She's perfect" and later on the same page quoting a friend of Hayley's mother (i.e., not Hayley's class teacher), "There is this wee little thing with such an accurate voice [...] It's not hugely strong, but she just has perfect pitch." It is evident that the intent here is comments on a 6-year-old's unusual pitch accuracy and vocal quality. Nothing about this suggests that Hayley was observed to have "perfect (or absolute) pitch," and I know of no other sources (Hayley's interviews, writings, etc.) that ever claim she has absolute pitch. The writer of the main article simply misinterpreted the family friend's reported comment. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jpbrownca ( talk • contribs) 20:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Reposted at Talk:Hayley Westenra#The editing conundrum over the wording 'pitch perfect' hoping for more knowledgeable discussion. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 10:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Battle of P3Y-229 Gamer83 15:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Note: And to think I just mentioned elsewhere how much I disliked these types of things...heh. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 10:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I specifically asked on last october to my Language professor at my high-school. This professor has got upper studies and knows Latin quite good, he is a teacher at high school and university in the same school. He asked me whether it was a catholic verse from the bible, because the first meaning he gave me was the one stated. But then he consulted some books and told me that was not exactly correct, and another possible translation was "Save yourselves.." because of the ending of the verb 'Servatis'. Nevertheless he was not sure. This March though, another professor, author of some books published by the school (in Mexico) told us he knew Latin. I asked him as well, and he told me he did not know exactly what did "servatis" mean, possible "save me", "save us" or as an imperative form, "save yourself". There can be no reference about that, don't you think? I tried to search in wikipedia and other sources about this particular suffix, -tis, but was unsuccessfull. My only source I have explained to you. Thanks for your time, and I hope you take this into consideration, as it is NOT an invention of mine. 189.130.123.80 17:29, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

(Replying here as anon uses a dynamic IP address) After considering the issue, I realised that translations in general would fall under Wikipedia's no original research policy. To that end, I removed the theoretical translation from the article and reworded to show that the existing translation came directly from Evanescence's website. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 10:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Again me, I know it must be boring. Ok if you visit the reference I put on the article, you will find in the news archive for July 11th, 2007, a small post that announces that they will NOT post the pictures because the management requested so, seeing as these images were leaked onto the internet without their consent. The official video release is not stated. But I think this confirms that the captions are from the video. I do not know whether I may remove my previous reference where I link to the page that holds the captions, and I'll leave that to your consideration. Again, than you for your attention. 189.188.2.95 21:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

(Replying here as anon uses a dynamic IP address) The issue is not really that the photos were available or not, but that the announcement was referenced from a fan-site. Wikipedia policy states that such websites should not be used for citations, because they have little or no accountability, verifiability or notability (except among a limited subset of fans, which simply isn't good enough...no pun intended). This is similar to the reasons why Evanescencereference.info and random Evthread.com forum posts (except for those explicitly written by Amy Lee or another band member) cannot be used as references. Also, realise that the mere leaking of a few pictures really isn't that notable in the scheme of things. The leaking of the song or video itself is only marginally notable, and usually receives little more than a single sentence. Just keep such things in mind when adding content in the future. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 10:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for offering to help with my signature but I will try to figure it out on my own. You've already done enough for me. Getting me out of trouble and all that. So if i can, if you ever need me i will be more than happy to return the favor. -- Bloodsource 18:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Greetings, you recently added title logo images for Good Enough and Sweet Sacrifice. I've removed these per Template:Infobox Album#Details and WP:ALBUM#Details (note that several other editors have also removed similar images from albums and songs), which states not to use these, as violation of fair-use. To this end, I ask that you not re-add these types of images in the future. Thanks! -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 01:55, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the info. i hadn't realised so, but then you should also check the pages for Call Me When You're Sober and Lithium, because they have logos on the titles too. Thanks again.

Ps: I'm also the one with IP adress 189.188.2.95, but sometimes i forget my password and edit without login in lol...so as I've filled uselessly a big space of this page, you may want to delete my posts, I merely tell you those were also my contributions and you can erase them if you want to ;). Ivanescence 21:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Yeah, I'm currently working my way through some other stuff, and then I'll remove the images from the remaining Evanescence articles. Cheers! (Also, be careful to not remove others' posts on talk pages when you write something. I've fixed mine, just be aware of it in the future.) -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 02:18, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of terms in Charmed, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of terms in Charmed. Thank you. Corpx 07:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Would we be able to use The Book of Three to source the article? --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 17:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Re: Book of Three...I have no idea. Given they are both primary documents, it really wouldn't make a difference. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 17:11, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I swear, people got bored and decided to wage war against any article that is related to TV. First images, then the war over episode articles, now lists. What's next, the main articles?! --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 17:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) To be perfectly blunt: yes. Next up for deletion will be supporting articles (characters, main artifacts, etc). Main articles will remain because there can be absolutely no justification for removing television series main articles. It has been tried. As I'm dealing with over on a Stargate article, it might be a good idea to archive all the Charmed articles and re-establish them over on a Wikia site (have I discussed this before?). -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 17:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikia sucks though (in my opinion), the only thing keeping the cruft to a minimum here is the policies. Over there cruft is everywhere. I've been able to use the Charmed magazines to add set info to some of the episodes, hopefully I can find some more of my magazines and find ways to source other articles. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 17:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

You said that perhaps a checkuser is in order; you are welcome to request one at WP:RFCU. >Radiant< 11:07, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm trying to figure out a few things when adding Season 7 and Complete Series.

I somehow added an extra square and don't know how to undo it and I'm still trying to figure out background colours. Can you take a look and tell me how I can fix it? I don't want you to fix it until I give it a shot. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinepowell ( talk • contribs) 16:28, 20 July 2007

Is there some reason why you haven't gotten back to me? I even sent you an e-mail on the subject, did you get it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinepowell ( talk • contribs) 17:44, 26 July 2007

2007, August Information

(X-Posted) Please do not add non-free images to infoboxes in articles, as this violates Wikipedia's fair-use policy. To qualify for fair-use, a non-free image must directly address a particular topic within the article, and not simply be used for decorative purposes.

Beyond that, I don't understand why you are using what appears to be photographs of promotional pictures. While using the promos themselves isn't advisable, using photographs of them is even less so. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on my talk page. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 06:40, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

How about screenshots taken from television. Would they be appropriate to use in infoboxes in articles I have edited? Kkbhe 05:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) No, because television programs are copyrighted, and no fair-use images should be used in infoboxes except in cases where it is impossible to get a free image (like CD or DVD covers). Living people should ideally never have fair-use images on their articles, except for times where the image itself is part of a description or specific topic within the article (such as caps from music videos). Yes, it is a tricky situation, and there isn't really a definitive answer, and I'm not an even an expert, but I'd advise that until you learn more about how various systems work on the site, don't include fair-use images at all. Just give it some time, and meanwhile, go out and take some pictures yourself for the site! :) -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 09:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

How come you keep replacing my Piper pic with the free image of Holly Marie Combs, but not the Promo Pheobe pic with the free Alyssa Milano image or the Prue pic with the free Shannon Doherty image? The unusual ruling about images isn't placed on any other charmed character's pages or any other fictional character's pages for that matter, so why does it apply to the Piper Halliwell article, but no-one else's? Kkbhe 05:12, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Kkbhe, do not replace the free Holly Marie Combs image with a fair-use image. This violates our fair-use policy, which states that if a free image is available (especially when the subject matter looks identical to the person they portray, and in this case, Combs' image is fine for ID'ing Piper), that the free image must be used. Cheers. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 11:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I made the edit to the Evanescence article while I wasn't logged in. I just forgot to sign in. Anyway, I do not in any way understand how marking Evanescence as a one-member band is in any way non constructive, especially with this article circulating the internet from an interview she did: From http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3807713:

"I am Evanescence. I am the only original member. I have basically hired the band. Evanescence has become me. It is mine and it's exactly how I want to be."

I will be readding the tag to the article per this interview. If you still find it to be non constructive, please tell me why. Marsofel 04:17, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Regardless of what Amy Lee says, the band is not a single member deal. If there are multiple signed or hired members, there are more than one persons involved in the band. Please do not readd this without some discussion on the article's talk page. Cheers! -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 06:17, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm curious about your recent edit to Dombarovskiy. Your edit turned prose text into a bullet list. Usually Wikipedians prefer text to lists -- what was the motivation for the reverse in this case? Thanks! ( sdsds - talk) 19:55, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) In my experience, while prose is usually preferred, when it appears that additional data can/should be added that would make such prose bulky and unreadable, lists are the better way to go. Given that more than just the Genesis modules have launched from Dombarovskiy, it seems reasonable that additional missions can be included in this format. Hence, the {{ expand list}} template. If you don't like it, feel free to change it back to prose (though I'd suggest a completely new wording as opposed to a simple revert), but I felt this was the better way to represent this particular set of data. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 20:05, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

You were asking about the Lillix category going away. A nav template is usually preferred for linking band-related articles. See Category:Band templates for extensive examples. Feel free to drop by Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians if you have any questions. Cheers, Xtifr _tälk 05:35, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Thanks for the suggestion, I'm not sure why I've not made a template yet. I work extensively with Evanescence, basically made it's template how it is today, so that will be no problem. Cheers! -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 05:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey Huntster, could you jsut clear up why you removed some of the personel listed on the album on this edit [1]? thanks -- Childzy ¤ Talk 12:54, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) :A standard has got to be found for these albums. Some were beginning to list every single credited person on the case, which completely fails our indiscriminate information policy. I'm toning it down the absolute basics. If a better method can be found, fine, but till then I'd suggest leaving it in minimal form. I'm frankly getting sick of the crap that tends to creep into these articles over time, and this is just one part of it. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 13:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you there but i did add some more back, such as the drummer, bassist, choir and guest vocals. I think all of them that are now listed did play a recognizable part in the album you agree? -- Childzy ¤ Talk 13:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Btw i like how you have set it out on Origin (demo CD) -- Childzy ¤ Talk 13:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Thanks, and I sorta-kinda agree with the extra personnel in that regard, to the extent of compromise. However, when we start adding individual names of a choir and programmers and such, it is a sure sign of bloat. The other question is, exactly how are some of these guests notable, other than simply being there? I'm trying to find a middle ground as many people want as much data as can be tossed in, even though I'd strongly prefer having only the primary band members listed...it is really the only unbiased way of proceeding. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 15:32, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah i remember that it once actually listed every member of the choir which is excessive! I think guest vocalists can be considered notable as the usually play a major part in a song. We could come up with some sort of draft guideline to use at WP:Album for whom to include on the personnel section. It may prove handy -- Childzy ¤ Talk 15:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Certainly, though even background or guest vocalists are a slippery slope. If they are considered vitally important to a song, aren't the directors and producers and compilers vitally important as well? It just seems dangerous, but it'll work for now. Personally, I like guidelines and policies, so any you want to propose over at WP:ALBUM is good with me :P -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 15:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I like guidelines as well really, it just keeps things smart tidy and encyclopedic instead of just being rambling lists of crap that end up appearing. The best thing that happened to the site was the whole thing about removing trivia, I hate trivia sections lol. But yeah I'm sure together we can come up with a basic outline of what should and shouldn't be in personnel sections. Obviously all band members should be listed. Secondly and guest vocalist should be added or are we not sure on this one yet? Thirdly and choir or backing group/singers that make a continued appearance on the album should be included. As for the producer then I'm not sure, if the article has an infobox then its always mentioned there so it needn't be written twice. What do you think? -- Childzy ¤ Talk 15:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)