User talk:Sus scrofa

Welcome!

Hello, Sus scrofa, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Infrogmation 16:44, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mutant Chronicles

Regarding your recent edit to Mutant Chronicles (diff), I believe that Target Games AB is and always has been a child company of Paradox Entertainment, though Paradox had a different name originally. — Saxifrage ✎ 16:38, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, yeah, the company history of Target Games is kind of fuzzy.. At first (for instance) I thought Target started off under the name Äventyrsspel but others have said otherwise. I think Paradox was a child company of Target Games, and then Target went bust for some reason around -99 and the IP of Target was transfered to Paradox. I think I could source this but the sources are in Swedish and I don't know if the rules allows that. --Sus scrofa 17:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was playing Warzone at the time Target Ireland went belly-up and dragged the rest of the miniatures divisions with it. If I recall correctly, the parent company shut down Target and changed their own name to Paradox. What it was before I don't recall though. I believe the IP wasn't transferred though, but that it was always owned by the parent company. — Saxifrage ✎ 23:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so on in this pdf: http://runan.info/pdf/nummer/runan37.pdf (sidebar on page 26), Fredrik Malmberg, one of the founders of Äventyrsspel, is asked if Äventyrsspel began as a separate company that was then remade as Target Games. The answer is kind of fuzzy, but Malmberg says that Äventyrsspel had one ownership structure, Target Games one and Tradition (a game store) had another and that after some time the companies were joined into one concern with Target Games "on top" and Malmberg as general manager. No mention of Paradox.--Sus scrofa 20:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paradox "happened" a while after that. Ah, here's a good source for the article: http://www.mobygames.com/company/paradox-entertainment-ab ! There the author says that Target Games restructured into three divisions, with one being the "parent" of three other companies. The parent-of-three later changed its name to Paradox Entertainment, which later bought the IP of one of the others... Wow, and it gets even more complicated. I'm still not sure I understand what happened there after reading the article once through. In any case, it does sound like there was a transfer of IP, though only for legal reasons: it seems that Paradox is a direct descendant of the original Target Games (before it was called Target Games AB). — Saxifrage ✎ 20:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think I understand the history now: Target Games restructured into a company called Target Games which owned three other companies: Target Games AB, Target Games Adventure AB, and Target Games interactive AB. Target Games Adventure AB was the parent company of the US, Ireland, and UK comanies that produced Warzone and Cronopia. Target Games interactive AB then changed its name to Paradox Entertainment, bought Target Games Adventure AB from Target Games (the top-most company). Later, people from Target Games who had left the company bought Paradox Entertainment from Target Games so that Paradox was now an independent company.

So, Target Games, Target Games AB, and Paradox Entertainment are all different companies, though Target Games owns Target Games AB and used to own Paradox Entertainment. I think it would be accurate for the article to say that Mutant Chronicles was developed by Target Games and is now owned by Paradox Entertainment which is a spin-off from Target Games. Does that make sense? — Saxifrage ✎ 20:52, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that sounds about right. --Sus scrofa 21:04, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Actress Lane, Priscilla, promo photo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Actress Lane, Priscilla, promo photo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Rossrs 16:13, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I uploaded that image there was a licensing option for it in the drop down menu, that's all I remember frankly. Since there is a replacement image under free license in the Lane Sisters aricle the image could proably be deleted right away.--Sus scrofa 17:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mauser C96

Why must you remove the Han Solo reference on that page? That movie is perhaps the most prominent pop culture reference to the gun ever. 71.197.86.137 20:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply, my internet has been down. It's my understanding that all such references should be listed at List of appearances of C96 in popular culture instead. Apparently the gun-focused wiki-editors have reached a consensus that pop culture references shouldn't appear in gun articles at all. --Sus scrofa 09:47, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Brad Pitt in Johnny Suede.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Brad Pitt in Johnny Suede.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Galic

Congratulations! You contributed to an article that is Galic compliant and has been nominated for inclusion in Wiipedia Version 0.0.1. Unfortunately you can not receive credit for your contributions because your username is not Galic compliant. Note that the sum of all encrypted letters in any given Galic word may not be congruent to 2 modulo 26 when encrypted using the Vigenere cipher (23,22,24). Than_s! (Oh yeah, no K's) 129.2.175.110 08:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey St. Clair

Hi, since you removed the proposed deletion tag from Jeffrey St. Clair, I invite you to put your opinion on the deletion discussion at the above link. --Tony Sidaway 19:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ty for editing Lend-Lease Sherman tanks

The page is formatted much better now. Thank you! WinterSpw 14:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It was part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Infobox conversion for Template:AFV.--Sus scrofa 14:27, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contact How?

Hello,

my mail is r.rehmet@gmx.de 212.23.126.20 21:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC) concerning nazi germany[reply]

We can discuss this here or in the relevant article.--Sus scrofa 21:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Mutant,_box_cover_of_1989_version_of_Swedish_role-playing_game.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Mutant,_box_cover_of_1989_version_of_Swedish_role-playing_game.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 13:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Actress Anita Louise, studio photo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Actress Anita Louise, studio photo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit to Hemvärnet

Thanks for finding that; no matter how much I stared at the code, I couldn't see that borked tag. --Adamrush 17:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it was me that put that in there so I'm to blame as well. All's well that ends well I guess. :) --Sus scrofa 22:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in that case, maybe you'll go to Limbo with all the unbaptized babies. --Adamrush 19:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Actress Patsy Kelly, promo photo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Actress Patsy Kelly, promo photo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 01:57, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You deserve a barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		for your active work on the sometimes thankless and never-ending task of attempting to clear up the huge backlog on Wikipedia:Cleanup. --Lendorien 22:09, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man :) --Sus scrofa 22:10, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Hale,_Barbara_01.jpg

I have tagged Image:Hale,_Barbara_01.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Rette tast 15:47, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

La ley de Herodes

Hi, why do you keep changing "La ley de Herodes" name?... if you check other mexican movies in wikipedia, you'll notice that they keep their original names (for example "Y tu mamá también" and "Sexo pudor y lágrimas"

Thanks -nubita

Well, when I created the article about the film, I used the Spanish name but it was moved in accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) guideline. So in general film articles should use the English name if there is one.--Sus scrofa 19:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, i didn't know it... thanks

Nihonjinron

Re your remark. 'please don't use the article as a notebook.'

I haven't. It's material left over by prior posters, who haven't troubled to keep in there and place it. It's their notebook stuff, not mine.Nishidani 12:03, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that leftover text shouldn't be left in the article; either delete it if it doesn't belong or move it to the talk page for discussion. Commenting out the text in question was sort of an ad hoc solution.--Sus scrofa 12:13, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Abdul Baqi Purani

I remove the {{db-nonsense}} tag from Abdul Baqi Purani. May be AFD-able or PROD-able, but it's not the sort of thing that WP:CSD#G3 is intended to cover. I strongly suspect that it could be turned into more than a stub by someone who had access to a decent library. Best regards, Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:56, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought {{db-nonsense}} covered WP:CSD#G1 and not 3?--Sus scrofa 17:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It actually covers both, but, yes, G1 was what I should have said. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

stop the macarthur edit war

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_MacArthur first of all, i am not Leavepower. i added citation, we must avoid none-neutral POV edit. some civic group is not epresent to all s.korean, OK? can you understand this mean? your edit is cleary out of neutral point of view. and influence to misunderstanding to s.korean. you word "south korean" which is too wide. you must distinguish some civic group from another s.korean. also, s.korea is "fully" democracy country. any demonstration is free. even anti-korea gov demonstration. Dutyterms

"South Korean groups" only marked the groups as being South Korean; it's not correct to say that wording would mean that they represent the whole country (the groups who want the statue to stay are also South Korean). For example, the Communist Party USA is an American group, its small size doesn't make a difference in that regard. The reason I reverted the first edit was because it marked the groups as "pro. North Korean", which was not supported by the citation, however I think the paragraph in question is fine as it is as of writing. The state of South Korean democracy has nothing to do with the subject at hand.--Sus scrofa 14:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]