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.

Hi Serge. I'm not sure if you blocked the IP editor previously, but rather protected some of the discographies they were editing, but they've come back full force especially in the last week. There are now way too many discographies to protect so I think blocking is the only answer. They are obsessed with separating singles sections into decades, repeating citations, often replacing sourced charts with unsourced ones....it's all a mess. I know you try to avoid blocking ranges but maybe @ Ferret: could help out? I'm not seeing anything constructive other than discography vandalism on the ranges 181.203.160.112/16, 191.126.141.178/16 and 191.125.172.41/16. Maybe those are too broad, maybe Ferret could shorten the ranges, I'm no IP range expert but something needs to be done as they were still actively editing today and finding more discographies to do this to. At the very least they're not explaining themselves, being a nuisance, and clearly IP hopping. Thanks. Ss 112 11:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

The 181.x is indeed a /16 range. Unfortunately... 191.x is actually a /14 range. That's a bigger pain to deal with. -- ferret ( talk) 13:30, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't mind playing "whack-a-mole" if you let me know of prominent affected articles or IPs. Sergecross73 msg me 18:36, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

The problem is they keep finding new discographies to do this to. Like last time, they've hit up Gary Barlow discography, Robbie Williams discography, Take That discography, Morrissey discography, Celine Dion singles discography, Jamiroquai discography, Elvis Presley singles discography, Cher singles discography, Gorillaz discography, Blur discography multiple times. But they're still actively editing today (I've reverted multiple rounds of edits to more discographies I haven't mentioned), and they've been at this since at least March 1, which is why I think multiple range blocks are needed because it's showing no signs of stopping. Ss 112 00:22, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

I know its frustrating, but at least its all being caught and corrected pretty quickly... Sergecross73 msg me 17:18, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

How long does this have to go on though? It's disruptive at this point. I've asked them to stop and they haven't. They are still regularly utilising all three of the ranges I listed above. Ss 112 03:43, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Its absolutely disruptive, but what would you have me do? Page protection really wouldn't have helped in most of your examples above because he doesn't return to them. And ferret is saying they're difficult to range block. it appears to be one of those situations where they're competent at IP hopping, but completely incompetent at doing any lasting damage. You're free to bring it up at RFPP or ANI and see if they have any ideas. Sergecross73 msg me 12:19, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

You asked me for examples of prominent articles and IPs, so I gave you both, now you're telling me you can't do anything and to go elsewhere. I also didn't request page protection—I asked if you or Ferret could block the IPs directly—so I don't know why I'd bother going to RFPP if I just said protecting individual articles won't work. Sure, maybe they won't do "lasting damage", but that's only because I'm reverting their edits (and they're returning to make some of the same ones over and over again). I'd prefer nobody have to curb their disruption. I don't know what ANI would be able to suggest that Ferret could not feasibly do already and I hate that place. Ss 112 05:08, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

You asked "How long does this have to go on?". I was responding to that question. I'm saying it's not a matter of "how long" - they're already past the threshold in theory, it's just that there's not much that I can do in this scenario, but that it's not the end of the world because they're largely incompetent at whatever it is they're trying to do. Sergecross73 msg me 01:12, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey Serge sorry to bug ya about another list but I am struggling with the GameCube games list speficaly if its a Japan exlusive they say to put it in romaji and I kind of struggle got any advice if you want just take a look at the article and see. NakhlaMan ( talk) 06:55, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

An example is Nintendo Puzzle Collection which is English so do u put as in hepburn: Nintendō Pazuru Korekushon or Nintendo Puzzle Collection. NakhlaMan ( talk) 06:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't appear that many others are editing the article these days, and I'm not sure if there's an official, standardized way. If no one is disagreeing with you, I'd just say handle it like however you'd like to handle it. Sergecross73 msg me 16:08, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey Serge I have been editing lists for consoles and I noticed there is a seperate list for Famicom and NES games but there is no list for Super Famicom games. So I am just wondering how can I bring this up to like the heads of Video Game Project to greenlight the artcle since ur better at this stuff than me. NakhlaMan ( talk) 14:04, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, no problem, I can start up a discussion for you at WT:VG, and tag you on it so you can follow/respond if you like. Personally, to me, its strange that we have separate NES and Famicom lists, but I haven't really edited many of those lists, so I could be out of the loop. (I spend a lot more time at the List of cancelled video games-related lists than the ones that actually released.) Sergecross73 msg me 16:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Started it here if you wish to follow along. Sergecross73 msg me 16:35, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Serge. Just wanted to get your opinion on a user changing Template:Navbox musical artist to Template:Navbox to stylize it like this. Another user made a similar change to AC/DC's template that I previously reverted, but I've just noticed this has been done too. I imagine it's in violation of WP:ACCESS for its stylized colors and circumventing the standardized formatting of templates, but just wanted to know what you thought and if you think it's worth my dropping a note on the (experienced, as they've been here for nine years) user's talk page about not doing it. Ss 112 11:15, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

You're right, even beyond accessibility stuff, there's been multiple discussions across Wikiprojects that generally say don't color infoboxes and stuff like that. It's more of a wikia thing. Have you tried notifying him of this? We've crossed paths over the years, and he's usually open to listening. Sergecross73 msg me 18:18, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

I just wanted to say i was sorry for supporting a stance without citing any wikipedia guidelines or policies on the merge discussion for the Nes/Famicom list. You had every right to think i was a sockpuppet or a meatpuppet. From now on i will cite my stances with wikipedia policies. Blitzfan51 ( talk) 01:03, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I just want to ask you for advice. Is there any necessity to add touring members into the timeline of any band? Because sometimes I see that it is added, sometimes it isn't. I am a little confused, so if there is any explanation or guidelines for this? Thanks. -- Tobi999tomas ( talk) 06:05, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I can't point to any specific guideline off the top of my head, but I've generally trimmed touring members out because often times they substantially bloat the size of the timeline, making it difficult to read. Sergecross73 msg me 13:06, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey Serge, there's an IP editor not sticking to one IP who's been reverting on-and-off on both these pages for a month and won't follow WP:BRD. ( [1], [2], now a third time: [3]). Would you be able to protect both so this can be put to a stop? Thanks. Ss 112 12:45, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I've protected the discography article, but held off on the song one, I don't think that one's quite hit the level of needing it yet. Sergecross73 msg me 12:49, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Regarding your edit summary on Template:Foo Fighters, I hope you don't mind me creating the article Rescued. The fact of the matter is the single has been officially released and it has made some official charts so it is eligible for its own article. There will be more to add to it in the weeks to come. If the last three Foo Fighters' studio albums are anything to go by the song will probably enter the UK singles chart in the same week that the new album enters the albums chart, so it will have more notability then, but as mentioned has already been released and has made some subsidiary charts. Cheers. QuintusPetillius ( talk) 13:21, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't really believe it's ready, but I also don't believe in redirecting songs that will obviously notable very soon, so I won't challenge it. I'll likely maintain and expand it over time, but I don't really think there's much to expand upon at this point, which was why I hadn't created it myself. Sergecross73 msg me 13:42, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Serge. Can you extend protect List of highest-grossing media franchises indefinitely? Because of recent edits [4] and [5]. Because I'm the only person reverting these edits despite the article having 222 page watchers. I think that would be for the best Timur9008 ( talk) 11:05, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Looking at the page history, I don't think WP:SEMI page protection would actually do anything to the involved editors. And full protection would lock you out too. Sadly, I think this is the sort of article that just requires constant maintenance... Sergecross73 msg me 15:10, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

No worries. I just kinda wish the people who watch the page would be more involved. Timur9008 ( talk) 15:18, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

There's only 3 reverts in the last 60 days, it's not exactly under constant disruption. Lists like this are always primarily maintained by 1 or 2 very interested parties, while other watchlisters are there to watch for clear obvious bad behavior or participate on talk page. -- ferret ( talk) 15:20, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

True. I do think when the semi-protection runs out on July 14 the article would need to be protected again because when it uprotected there was disruption. Timur9008 ( talk) 15:26, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

There's plenty of sysops watching. -- ferret ( talk) 15:28, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

You think it is a good idea to remove genres, ratings (ESRB, etc) or any other column that would just clutter up for several list of games specfically for consoles? NakhlaMan ( talk) 02:49, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Which lists in particular? It'd help for context. None of those should have ESRB/ratings, at least. Almost all of the lists have genres though, and removing that would need a broader project consensus. It's been mulled over before. -- ferret ( talk) 02:55, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Dreamcast games list. NakhlaMan ( talk) 03:39, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I removed the genre column for N64 and GBC games and nobody seemed to revert it yet. NakhlaMan ( talk) 03:39, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Already removed the ESRB and number of players for the Dreamcast list no I just need an approval if I can remove the genres column or not. NakhlaMan ( talk) 04:38, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree with ferret - consensus is generally that Wikipedia doesn't cover ESRB stuff at all unless sonething particularly noteworthy or controversial happened regarding it (like Conker 64 getting an M for Mature rating.) Genre...I'd personally support removing, but ferret is right that you may end up facing opposition to it eventually. Sergecross73 msg me 20:32, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't think genre being removed should be decided on a single list and "away from project". Would recommend broaching it at WT:VG as a sorta "MOS" decision for our platform lists. -- ferret ( talk) 21:21, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Earlier today, you decided to block me after another admin who is bias against me decided to request that you block me so he wouldn't have to face the consequences for blocking me without proper cause. The reason he blocked me because I made THREE edits(all of which were reverted by Ferret only) that "didn't have reliable sources" but were otherwise good changes. This most recent one pushed him over the top. Also, he didn't request that I remove it, he just reverted it without a reason given, so I reverted them. I generally like to keep changes as minimum as possible, so I didn't remove it because I didn't want to do anything drastic. I provided a reliable source(the official game page), but they decided to block me from the page I am most active on. This is one of the most unfair blocks I have seen. I have made over 200 edits to other pages that weren't reverted and still remain, so i can CLEARLY make edits, so why am I being blocked for something as petty as 'cant get any sources when they don't exist", also, that sentence that I changed was there for months, but I'm the one being block because I tried to change it? It makes no sense. Therefore, I request an appeal LordEnma8 ( talk) 20:03, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

You keep making edits to that articles that are either unsourced, or poorly sourced, it appears multiple editors have requested you stop, and you haven't, so the block was placed to force you to stop.

A more persuasive unblock request would be you repeatedly successfully making WP:EDITREQUESTs with appropriate sourcing that get approved by other editors. That would persuade me. The above argument just shows that you either don't understand our sourcing policies, or don't understand what sort of content belongs in an encyclopedia. Sergecross73 msg me 20:23, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Hey Serge just wondering why has no one started on the NES/Famicom list yet? NakhlaMan ( talk) 05:21, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

I think it's just that no one's volunteered to do it yet (except that one editor who admitted he didn't know enough to do it yet.) Sergecross73 msg me 20:53, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Well I certainly can’t do it because I am not prepared for a project that big. But anyways no rush hope it happens sooner rather than later. NakhlaMan ( talk) 00:30, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).

Administrator changes Spicy Ale jrb Dbachmann DGG ( deceased) Jimbo Wales

CheckUser changes Jimbo Wales Oversighter changes Jimbo Wales

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.

Technical news

• Progress has started on the Page Triage improvement project. This is to address the concerns raised by the community in their 2022 WMF letter that requested improvements be made to the tool.

Arbitration

• The proposed decision in the World War II and the history of Jews in Poland case is expected 11 May 2023.

Miscellaneous

• The Wikimedia Foundation annual plan 2023-2024 draft is open for comment and input through May 19. The final plan will be published in July 2023.

Hi Serge. What's your opinion of "stylized as..." notes at the start of articles? I and a few other pop music editors (Lil-unique1 being one I've noticed) have been removing them on articles over the last few year or so, as simply saying "stylized in all caps", "all lowercase" or "sentence case" is incredibly trivial, and there's nothing at MOS:CAPS or any capitalisation-related guideline about noting the importance of a case difference (which is basically never followed in every news source on a given topic anyway), only a direction to standardise them. I'm asking as last week, an editor added a parenthesised stylisation note to Golden Hour (song), which I manually reverted the following day, and they felt it was important enough to restore it several days ago, which I only just noticed today, reverted, and asked them to follow WP:BRD on their talk page here. These editors always cite some other pop music example like Billie Eilish's or Ariana Grande's songs, as if the notes should be present on those articles either (or that whataboutism is ever a great argument to resort to). It's getting very tiring to remove but I'm hoping it will catch on the more I say about it. (Apologies if I've asked your take on this before, can't recall.) Ss 112 05:13, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm also very against those sorts of notes. I don't believe it necessary to explain the blatantly obvious that has no importance or possible alternate interpretation. I try to remove them when I see them too. As you've likely noticed, I don't spend a lot of time in the pop music area, but I'll try to do my part in the rock music world. Sergecross73 msg me 13:26, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Hey Serge there is a user who constantly keeps putting Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake in the cancelled SNES games category and they keep reverting it and putting it back and after constant times, I want to know how to get the user reported assuming it’s a sock puppet or whatever. The user is 71.44.157.137 NakhlaMan ( talk) 00:59, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Looks like someone beat me to it - they protected the page to make it so IP address editors can't edit it, which is often what we do when it's an IP largely targeting one page. Dont let them stress you out - if they're doing ut repeatedly line that, page protection generally works pretty well. Sergecross73 msg me 14:48, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Hey Serge I searched far and wide and I really cant find a proper rules for lists of video game. Because it makes no mention on whether we add the romaji name for a Japan exlusive game, or if we list the NA name first and then the alternaive English name for PAL regions second or vice versa, or if games with numbers particulary sports games like they used to FIFA 2002, and then middle of the decade they switched to 06 insteaf of the full year. So Serge please help me. NakhlaMan ( talk) 03:41, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Also do we exlude bundle compilations like NES Remix Pack and even variants like the Shindo Pak versions for Mario 64? NakhlaMan ( talk) 03:42, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, a bit short on time at the moment, but I know MOS:VG has a ton of guidance on editing video game articles. Can't say for certain it answers your questions but you could give it a look. Sergecross73 msg me 17:27, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Serge. Could you consider implementing full page protection of No.6 Collaborations Project temporarily? I understand the page history is not that disruptive at present, but since April 26, multiple editors have been changing its status as a studio album to something another source says, despite the last consensus on the number of studio albums by Sheeran at Talk:No.6 Collaborations Project in 2020 deciding No.6 should be counted as a studio album and that no other description (taking into account the sources there were at the time) was adequate. Various editors have also been changing the counts at = (album), - (album) (which was just released), as well as Ed Sheeran discography and Ed Sheeran. I've asked them to establish a new consensus, but a day or two goes by and there's a new editor I have to inform. I understand I could start the discussion myself, but I'm not the one seeking the change, even though I don't personally feel that strongly if a consensus decided to reclassify No.6 and even while a discussion would be ongoing, there'd still be editors changing it. Anyway, just asking if you think it's worth protection until consensus decides otherwise, as I don't believe my hidden notes are going to really stop anything. Thanks. Ss 112 03:55, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Sergecross73, on most Sonic games articles when i edit something, why do you and BlazeWolf keep removing the term However and acting like it's not necessarily worth using that term at all. It does not even say you cant use that term. Your just reverting my edits because you think you guys make the rules on Wikipedia or that you guys think things are not worth of anything at all. Just leave it where it is. 156.70.191.162 ( talk) 13:22, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

• Ss112 - Protected - I think there's been enough back and forth over it that one could call it a "slow motion edit war" of sorts. Hopefully it helps force a discussion of it.
• 155 - You'll have to give an example of what you mean. Your edit history doesn't show any examples, and I would not revert someone simply for using the word "however", so there must have been other issues with your edits. Sergecross73 msg me 18:21, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

I came across an indefinite user block that seems suspect on a number of counts. The blocking admin used Template:Checkuserblock-account with no further explanation, not even identifying which editor the user is suspected of being a sockpuppet of, and the user's contributions page shows they were never involved in editing conflicts or anything else that might lead one to suspect sockpuppetry. The blocking admin then reverted dozens of the user's edits under the sole justification of WP:BANREVERT, marking all their reverts as "minor". Going by the half dozen of so of the blocking admin's "minor" edits I've looked at, none of them are constructive, and they include cases of blatant vandalism ( here's a sample). After I reverted a handful of them, the blocking admin posted this on my talk page, which seems to confirm that they regard WP:BANREVERT as a blanket justification to revert any edit so long as they block the user first. That's not my understanding of WP:BANREVERT, but someone who believes that would certainly have motive for blocking in bad faith. Any advice? I realize that WP generally does not allow third party appeals of blocks, but I've stumbled across dozens of blocks in my years on Wikipedia and offhand I'd say that the vast majority were suspicious or at best insufficiently explained, and I've finally gotten tired of remaining silent about it. Martin IIIa ( talk) 23:44, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

@ Martin IIIa ( talk page watcher) I can tell you as a former checkuser, and long time admin in the VG area, this is indeed a TTT24 sock, with all the normal hallmarks. You stated this wasn't declared, but it's been on the user page since the block was placed in December. It was never obscured or hidden. TTT24 is a prolific long-term abuse user. While it's clear that Ponyo hit a couple of reverts while mass reverting that probably shouldn't have been restored, she's only human. Her response to you was simple and direct: You understood she was reverting for BANREVERT reasons, so all you had to do was let her know a few were mistakes and needed undone. To accuse her of vandalism is where you crossed a line. It's clear from the situation she had not intent to vandalize, and simply made a few mistaken reverts doing cleanup. Frankly, calling these Special:Diff/1153964514, Special:Diff/1153964629, Special:Diff/1153965048 edits "Vandalism" probably deserved an even sterner warning to you. There's no world where those are vandalism edits. You cast aspersions in bad faith, period. -- ferret ( talk) 01:12, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, Ferret; the sequence of events are precisely what you describe above. Had Martin IIIa restored the edits with an edit summary such as "restore more accurate redirects" or something similar, I would have thanked them (which I often do if I've reverted a banned user and another editor comes along and vets the edit before restoring it). If they have concerns regarding any block (or edit) I make my talk page is available to discuss. But calling my good faith clean-up "vandalism" irked me. My message to Martin may have been terse, but I stand by it.-- Ponyo ^{bons mots} 15:40, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I was away for most of the last 24 hours, but it appears Ferret and Ponyo just about covered it. Ponyo's reverts, even the ones that may have been accidental, are still compliant with BANREVERT. Hell, even outside of that, it seems most would have been compliant with the justification of BOLD editing. It only would have escalated to problematic if they had reverted you a second time after you had explained that you were restoring because they were valid.

This sort of stuff happens, and it's not that big of a deal. Sometimes you check the first 20 bad edits from someone and you just cut to the chase and undo the next 20 without checking as closely. And an editor like yourself catches some rare good ones and restores them. And everything is more or less just fine.

I will say though, that your classification of Ponyo's edits as "vandalism" is fundamentally incorrect though. Edits need to be made in bad faith to be considered vandalism, and neither the changes nor Ponyo's responses reflect that at all. Sergecross73 msg me 18:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

The TTT24 identification is declared on the user page (which I somehow overlooked checking), but the block log and talk page (certainly the logical places to look for a block explanation) both omit it. This is one of many instances where better documentation of a block would avert a lot of editor anxiety. As admins you don't have to worry about this, but imagine what it's like for a regular Joe editor to stumble on blocked editors and be unable to find adequate explanations for the blocks.

You guys keep saying "a few" or "rare", but I repeat, I've looked over more than a half dozen of Ponyo's reverts and not found any that were good. The "accidentally" thing is likewise an excuse that you're creating for Ponyo that they have not claimed for themselves; their post which I already linked instead insinuates that their edits were perfectly intentional. And if they were accidental, then what's the problem? If I were in Ponyo's shoes, and the reverts were accidental, I'd just drop by my talk page and say, "Hey sorry, I got into a bit of revert craze and wasn't paying close attention. Thanks so much for catching those!" I'd certainly see no reason to get defensive.

Anyway, I've said my piece; I don't expect it to make much difference, but I gave it my best shot. Martin IIIa ( talk) 21:30, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

the block log and talk page (certainly the logical places to look for a block explanation) both omit it. Maybe you're just not familiar, but we almost never put that information there, nor does any policy or guideline require we do so. The User Page is where we tag socks. I'd certainly see no reason to get defensive. I promise that if I reverted a bunch of your edits and put in the edit summary that they were Vandalism, you'd get extremely defensive. YOU started this by not just saying "I think this was constructive, so I restored it." It was YOU who went bad faith and accused Ponyo of deliberate malicious vandalism. And it was you, having been made aware of your bad faith aspirations, who then went to another sysop and made MORE bad faith accusations, such as saying the block itself had a bad faith motive. All you literally had to do, at any point, was simply ask Ponyo "Hey, could you explain this block?" -- ferret ( talk) 21:45, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Like I said, this wasn't even a failure of BRD, so outside of the failure to assume good faith, I'm not really seeing the problem. There's no active dispute, errors were caught and all content is as it should be. Feels more like a case study that shows that the system works. Sergecross73 msg me 21:56, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, since your last talk page message to him in December there have been 3 other user complaining about his genre warring ( 1, 2, 3) and I'm wondering if a sanction would be appropriate by now, especially since he never adresses any of the issues and just blanks the talk page -- FMSky ( talk) 14:46, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Hey Serge, not sure if u saw but I vastly improved the list of 32X games and I made it better, cleaner, and corrected some things, but the thing that bothers me is the refs because majority of them are from IGN and AllGame and I wouldnt consider them reliable for anythine that is pre-5th or even 6th gen. So I am just wondering if its ok to removed them and replace them with references like magazines and stuff. Dont worry I wont link them to Sega Retro even though they have some good stuff saved like magazines. Also for Surgical Strike which the 32X was only released in Brazil but Sega published and is the copyright holder but most Sega products or all of them are distrubted by Tec Toy so do I mention Sega or Tec Toy as publisher for the game. NakhlaMan ( talk) 05:38, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, unexpectedly busy today, but I'll try to give more detailed answers over time.

To start off, please don't remove any IGN or AllGame sources unless they're directly contradictory to another reliable source. Both are deemed usable per WP:VG/S. Going around removing them without reason would likely find you in hot water. Sergecross73 msg me 20:56, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

If you semi-protect this page: Nintendo DS, I give you a cup of tea! Thanks! Huggingface.co ( talk) 22:31, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppet, blocked. -- ferret ( talk) 22:42, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, was pretty certain something was up with their bizarre comments. Sergecross73 msg me 00:11, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Also I apolgise for repeating but I looked all over WikiProject and there is NO articles or rules for how to do video game lists and it is driving me crazy that there is no rules for this kind of thing. So Serge I know you dont have a lot of time in your hands but could u please show me an article about the definite way to do lists please. NakhlaMan ( talk) 06:52, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, NakhlaMan. Yeah, I think the reason there's no definitive format is become different lists document different things, and its hard to come up with rules that would apply to every single scenario.

Some of it may just depend on what you're trying to do. For example, I used List of Square Enix video games as a model when I created List of Nihon Falcom games a few months back, because it was a Featured List and its purpose matched the same thing I was doing. Generally speaking, any time you find a list that is tagged as a WP:FA or WP:GA, it means it was reviewed and approved by multiple editors, and as such, is probably a good example to follow.

But other times, if you're trying to do a more unconventional list, and there's no one around to discuss or argue with, you can always consider making up your own format too. For example, I didn't particularly like how we format all the "Years in music" list articles, so when I started making the Years in rock music articles, I made up my own format, which has stuck for the last 5 years without issue, knock on wood. In the video game world, I kind of made up my own format for the cancelled video game lists I've created or rewritten too - seen at places like List of cancelled Sega Dreamcast games. Because as much as the List of Square Enix video games is great, it didn't really make sense for the cancelled games list.

Feel free to propose ideas to me too, and I can tell you if I think its a good or bad idea. I'm generally aware of the discussions we've had over the years. For example, there's consensus against adding a column noting if a game was a physical or digital release. Don't add that. Generally, try to follow WP:NOTCATALOGUE too - you don't want it to look like a "buying guide" or something. And don't add anything you don't think we can reliably source for all entries either.

Anyways, let me know and I can field more questions on it. I'm happy to brainstorm with you. Other editors who watch my talk page may chime in too. Sergecross73 msg me 16:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate your reply for the above but unfortunately the only featured lists of software libarary for video games consoles are only 4 of them and tbh these were the lists I WAS doing and need ALOT more fixing believe it or not. Anyways I dont know if u got my message for finding better refs for 32X games but is it ok to replace IGN and Allgame with better sources like game magazines because well for games pre-N64 and espically 16 bit games the dates are usually not accurate so you know. Feedback would be appreciated. NakhlaMan ( talk) 02:38, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, if you can't find the good examples you're looking for, feel free to brainstorm ideas for improvement with me or at WT:VG. I don't know which all articles you're working on outside of the 32x one though. On that note, I did answer your question on sources, right below where you asked it. Here's a link to it. Sergecross73 msg me 02:53, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

If u want to know u can check my contributions page to see. Also I am brainstorming with you right now. NakhlaMan ( talk) 03:07, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Anyways I if you want to know without checking every contribution I did the main articles I am doing or focusing on right now is game lists for consoles. So far I already perfected some but some include GameCube and N64 but mainly I am focsuing on Sega consoles because I am trying to improve the Japanese relase dates because of this awesome source I found which is an official encyclopaedia from Sega Japan that lists the dates for every game in Japan link below. I pretty much perfected Game Gear which was sorta of incomplete mainly with links missing and so many red links. So yeah that is a summary

セガハード大百科｜セガ SEGA NakhlaMan ( talk) 03:11, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, I mean, you keep saying things like "these lists need a lot of work" and it's not immediately clear to me what sort of things you're referring to... Sergecross73 msg me 03:12, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

I wrote that before I read your response about GameCube, N64, and Sega consoles, for the record. Sounds like we're focusing on similar stuff, only I've been on the cancelled games lists. Sergecross73 msg me 03:15, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Oh sorry what I mean is there are some titles with red links meaning no articles, some without a publisher or developer, and some are NOT in alphabetical order because there is a hundread ways for alphabetical order, like for N64 someone put Supercross 2000 and Superman to go after Super Mario 64 and some random Japanese games, because people DONT go letter by letter which is WRONG. Also some have inaccurate dates and dont even use the same as the one in the article. NakhlaMan ( talk) 03:18, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Obviously done with hoping their old account will be unblocked, creating EDM song articles and adding charts otherwise. I pinged you on User talk:111.246.83.85. Ss 112 10:08, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Yup, that's him. Blocked and deleted. Sergecross73 msg me 11:05, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Sergecross73, hope you're doing well. I am not sure who to go to, maybe you can help out. I noticed that on the {{ Navboxes}} template, suddenly navboxes listed show up in a slightly larger font. I'm on my phone right now, but it's on the desktop version on my laptop computer as well. See Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny#External links where I noticed it, does it look the same to you as well? I don't know how to fix this, any idea? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 19:47, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

@ Soetermans This is probably intended, but I'm not 100% sure where a change might have been enacted. @ Izno:? -- ferret ( talk) 21:09, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Looking. I see a WMF culprit file but checking to see how intentional it was. Izno ( talk) 21:25, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Actually, I don't see what you're seeing (logged out). Headers have always been 100% font size relative to non-navbox things. The text itself is still hanging out at 88% of non-navbox things.

WMF is looking at increasing font size in Vector 2022 (14px base to 16px base) but 1) I don't know if you're using that skin and 2) I'm pretty sure that's not released. Izno ( talk) 21:53, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Izno, I use MonoBook. I've taken some screenshots, is it okay if I try to reach you through email? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 06:56, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Sure, but I don't have an issue if you just want to upload the screenshots to imgur or even phab:. Izno ( talk) 17:20, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry Izno, I forgot to reply. I'll try to do so tomorrow (I'm on Central European Time). soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 20:27, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, could you please help with the page List of Blumhouse Productions projects a user keeps reverting my revert even after I’ve explained why. I can’t revert again because of 3RR, the user is being rather disruptive although I think they mean well. Kind regards Lukejordan02 ( talk) 10:46, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi there. Honestly, you both should be discussing on the talk page. I have no idea who is right or wrong here, but there appears to be no active discussion on the talk page, which is a shortcoming for both of you. Sergecross73 msg me 20:43, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

I think there are some competency issues here [6]. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:37, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

I fully support re-blocking if that's what you'd like to do. I unblocked him because he technically met my conditions, and I wanted to keep my word...but it took him like a week to do what should take someone a couple minutes, so I can completely understand your concern. Sergecross73 msg me 22:43, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm OK with giving him a little bit more rope, but will reblock if continues to introduce poor grammar or add copyrighted material. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:48, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good. Let's both keep an eye on him, and I think we'll likely be on the same page for if/when a block is necessary. Sergecross73 msg me 23:22, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Sergecross. I noticed that you edited User:Mango bitz to provide what looks like a user warning. Just checking if this was intentional or if it should go on the user's talk. Cheers, Schminnte ( talk • contribs) 15:07, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Whoops! Sorry about that. I've fixed it. Sergecross73 msg me 15:11, 26 May 2023 (UTC)