User talk:Thingg

This is Thingg's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

For the Record...(header added by myself)

Welcome!

Hello, Thingg, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 22:52, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Archiving, shorthand, etc.

I saw your edit on the new user log and felt like I should reply, so here goes.

Archiving that page; I think I'll do that in a second.

Now, onto summaries; for starters, here's the main summary page, and here is a list of list of abbreviations. Hope that helps. Cheers! Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 05:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello Thingg. Thanks for taking your time out to welcome me to Wikipedia. I also love video games! Also, I'm Alithgon in Runescape (Lv.24), but I'm weak because I got killed and lost all of my items... (including weapons, armor, ect.) Well, I look forward to donating to Wikipedia. I'm new so I don't know how to do many things when I edit except writing and my signature. Also, I HATE revealing my personal info, so I'll never tell anybody real life personal info.

Alithgon (talk) 00:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution

This has already been discussed and people thought that since we have individual pages on each mechanism and process (Adaptation genetic drift, speciation etc) there was no advantage in a secondary division between the summary of the whole lot and the more detailed pages. Tim Vickers (talk) 04:06, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the size is references, which are needed to boilerplate the text against creationist wingeing. The article itself isn't all that big. :) Tim Vickers (talk) 04:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of computer games

I really do think my edit was more fitting. I've made similar edits on the relevant generations too.

The entire way wikipedia divides the history of computer games is all a bit wrong and way too America-centric. The names it uses to define the eras in particular are quite arbitrary- I recall mention that there was one minor book which used them which saved the person who decided to use them from being accused of OR. The 16-bit era is the most common name for the MD/SNES period, xth generation (4th IIRC) is never used outside of wikipedia (and those who took their lead from here).--Josquius (talk) 18:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I changed the 8-bit, 32-bit and PS2 et al one too. The bit names definatly apply to the 8-bit, 16-bit and 32-bit consoles. Its just when we reach the PS2 that there is really no set name for the generation. That's how the current system came to be adapted on wikipedia- at first we just called the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube generation 'the current generation' but once that was no longer the case there was just no name for it without making one up ourselves. They decided to wedo the entire lot to fit in to that pattern too (which I totally disagree with). --Josquius (talk) 20:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding NPOV, OR, and your rewrites

Just so you know, I an NOT trying to POV that article. I have been revamping all of the CVG History pages, and I tried to expand this article's coverage by including information gleaned from the articles on some of the consoles of this generation. If you could post on my talk page and let me know what I am writng that is POV. I would GREATLY appreciate it because I spent nearly 45 minutes working on that edit. Thank you. Thingg (talk) 19:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're new here, so I appreciate your zeal to contribute without being familiar with how things work here. The first problem with the Second generation edit was that you wiped the complete era (i.e. lasting until 1984). Secondly, all of your edits were based on WP:OR unless you cite verifiable sources. "and the public soon tired of them", "Though not the first system to challenge Atari, it was the first to pose a serious threat to Atari's dominance." "Although it never became as popular as the Atari," etc. etc. etc. all violate WP:OR. Thirdly, much of the wording violated WP:NPOV, i.e. "infant" "mercilessly attacked", etc. Wikipedia is not a personal article on a website, its an encyclopedia and strives to be written as such.

I should also add, regarding your comment "I have been revamping all of the CVG History pages,", please be advised that much of the pages don't exist in a vacuume, they exist because of the work of many authors. While Wikipedia promotes being bold, it also promotes don't be reckless. The discussion of edits, and even initially (before you make them) proposing them on the article's discussion page to gain consensus is also a normal part of the process on Wikipedia. It gives an opportunity for you to discuss your proposed edits with other main contributors to the article, allows points to be made on both sides, and in the long run saves 45 minute edits that violate other policies from having to occur. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 19:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to put the end of the generation date in my first edit. (actually, I was just starting to review my edit when you reverted. ...having forgotten once again to use the "Preview" button.) Also, the POV statements about Atari were not my writing; soimeone else put them there. (I do definately agree they should be removed.) The WP:OR thing you mentioned was taken from this page: Atari 2600#launch and runaway success (which I just noticed was labled as possibly OR, so I'll have to find something about the history of the 2600 to verfy/cite that) Anyway, if I remove the sections you mentioned, do you have any problems with me reinstating my edit? Thanks Thingg (talk) 20:06, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When I said "revamping," I meant organizing some information (I thought) that was badly written/presented. I was not trying to take all the credit for those articles. Indeed, I didn't even add any information at all to the articles other than the second generation. I just tried to make them easier to read. I don't think my edits to the other pages will be challanged, but if they are bad, I apoloigize for it. Thingg (talk) 20:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First - try and keep the discussion to just one talk page. Most of the discussion was here on your talk page, so we'll keep this there (i.e. don't read my response here and then respond again on my talk page). Second, discussions about article content should really be kept just on the article's own discussion page. Third, yes there's still a problem with adding that because regardless of the source, the content still violates NPOV and OR. What you did uncover though was the pages here on Wikipedia you took those from are rampant with those violations themselves and need to be worked on. I thank you for that. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 20:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hehheh Sorry about the whole "back and forth" thing with the talk pages. (and thanks for letting me know so I won't do that in the future.) I apologize for my bad editing, and I appreciate you setting me straight. I decided to reword the lead of History of video game consoles (second generation) to make it similar to the leads of the other CVG History pages. My new lead contains some non-cited materail , but I think that most (or all) of it is common knowledge and shouldn't be a problem. (If you feel it is a problem, say no more and I will remove it.)

Again, thanks a lot for all the helpThingg (talk) 20:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PlayStation 3

I am pleased with all of your grammar edits to the PS3 article and your link fixes, but the repeated saves make it harder to find vandalism. Could you please use the Show preview button instead of saving, especially when fixing the links? This would be helpful because the PlayStation 3 article is constantly vandalized. Still, great work, alot of the little things have been fixed.--WhereAmI (talk) 00:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. A lot of the reason for all the edits is because I was reading the article through and looking at each section for minor errors, which I would then fix. This does result in quite a few edits, and I can't think of any good way to remedy that problem because it is difficult to remeber the location of 5-6 edits when scrolling through line after line of code. However, I do realize that some of the edits could definately been avoided by using the "Preview" button. I think I picked up the habit of not using it as an IP user, and as you can see, I still have trouble remembering to use it. I'm working on it, and I think I've been doing a little better. Thingg 01:06, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note on tense and title

Was just touching up a few of your edits. First, wanted to say congrats, you're doing a lot of great contributions here and you've caught on quick. Just a few things:

1) The title change for the production section of 7800 was not neutral (i.e. "abandonment"). "Discontinuation" would be an example of a more neutral word.

2) Some of your tenses were off, or you changed tenses that were correct. Please consult the section Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Article_guidelines#Verb_tense in the WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. An example from a change you did in the Arcadia 2001 article: "and was powered by a standard 12-volt power supply" should be "and is powered...".

--Marty Goldberg (talk) 23:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks for advice. As you pointed out, I still have some trouble with POV and I appreciate you fixing it. Also, thanks for the link to the guidelines page. I didn't notice that page at WikiProject Video games, but I will definately make sure to follow it in the future. (In my previous edits, I was just aiming for continuity of tense in a section.) Thingg (talk) 23:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. You should also consider joining the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games itself, as well as the Atari Task Force if you're interested. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 23:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Out of Order Execution

You tagged the OoOE article for unverified facts. Was there anything particular that triggered that? The contents of article can be found in any graduate-level book on Computer architecture. Dyl (talk) 06:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, I meant to put the tag that's there now. As for what brought it on, I just noticed that it provided no citations for its material. I am not questioning what is said there (and I realize that's what the other tag meant and I'm sorry about that), the article simply needs citations. If you could provide them, I would appreciate it because I am not too familiar with the topic. btw, I totally agree with Wikipedia annoyance number 2 on your page. Thingg (talk) 19:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo GameCube

Hmm. I'm not an expert on this situation, but I actually think Mega Man 5 has a somewhat good point here. If the GameCube is failing, you can't put failed. That's what's happening, right? jj137 ^♠ 01:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You do have a very good point. If you would like to keep it your way, that's fine, because I think Mega Man has been going crazy to get it his way. Not everything here can be perfect. -- jj137 ^♠ 02:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xbox 360

I understand your removal of the Future development section of the Xbox 360 article. So that I can increase my Wikiknowledge, would you please point me to the Wikipage that describes what a primary source is? Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 02:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen that History of video game consoles (eighth generation) has been created and deleted several times, and your content was similar to what was included in that article(s). When I said "primary source" I meant Microsoft because they will be making the next Xbox console and until they say something about it, all thoughts and comments about it are just speculation. I realize that Wikipedia has no set policies in place regarding speculation about future consumer products, but the first sentence in the fourth point under WP:REDFLAG illustrates what I am trying to say: that until Microsoft says something about their next console, any and all speculation about it is just that, speculation, and should not be included in Wikipedia. I apologize for not being clear in my edit summary and I hope this incident will not damage your opinion of me as a Wikipedian. Regards, Thingg (talk) 03:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From Lspc79 (header added by myself)

Dear Freind, Thank you for your help and also the links, wish you a beutiful year and also a successful.

Best Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lspc79 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Barnstar

Thank you for the barnstar. Happy editing! --Silver Edge (talk) 01:28, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Xbox logo.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Xbox logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 non-free media 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I did give a fair use rational. See here for more. Thingg (talk) 03:03, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Image:Xbox logo.png

You placed this discussion in the wrong venue; if you want an image deleted, please take it to WP:IFD instead. I would have done so for you, but someone else has already placed a {{db-author}} tag on the image (author requests deletion), so IFD isn't necessary here. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 04:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I looked around for like 20 min, but couldn't find that page. Thanks for the help. btw, I was the one who put the db-author page there (I uploaded the image.) Thingg (talk) 04:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay. You just made a simple mistake, and I helped you correct it. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 04:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:HighDefShare2.gif

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:HighDefShare2.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 01:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added licensing. Forgot to do so on upload. Thingg (talk) 01:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:HighDefShare2.svg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:HighDefShare2.svg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:00, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Emmett Chappelle

I semi-protected it for two days. jj137 ^♠ 12:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Continental drift

I semi-protected it for three weeks. jj137 ^♠ 03:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not disruptive

No, you aren't being disruptive. =) The editors who revert warred over the image being included on the page (Ray andrew (talk · contribs) and Proctor spock (talk · contribs)) which lead to it being protected were the ones I was referring to. I actually respect your ability to try and discuss the issue in spite of it being two editors forcing this endless discussion on us. —Locke Cole • t • c 21:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS3

Looking much better now, esp. the lead. And definitely a good idea to look at other FAs to get a feel for how they do it. Keep up the good work. David Fuchs^(talk) 12:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Temple of Évora at DYK

Yes, this is the English-language Wikipedia, but that only means that articles are in English. It doesn't mean that English-language references are necessary. See WP:RSUE: "English-language sources should be used in preference to foreign-language sources, assuming the availability of an English-language source of equal quality". Roman Temple of Évora seems like something where the references would be in Portuguese. Regards, Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for not making myself clear. The article is excellently written, but I thought it might be a good idea to find some English references, if possible, for those readers who, like myself, can't read Portugese very well or at all. Again, my apologies; it was only a suggestion. Thingg (talk) 21:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the references are all in Portuguese and there's something available in English, even if it's very short, it's certainly worth adding it in as an external link or something. All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was agreeing, sort of. If there are no good English references then a not-good one could be included as an external link or something. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:19, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: PlayStation 3.. and your BRAAIINS!

You can never go overboard with citing, my friend. Of course, the issue sometimes is citing things which don't really need to be cited :P Looking through it, I see some issues with flow (PlayStation Network, Operating System sections) where it reads like a list, with single sentences off by their lonesome. You want to integrate those together to be more cohesive. I've done some minor changes in moving sentences around, nothing major. The Reception section now reads much more like a balanced and hindsight driven section. Some minor things: first, the PS3 Cluster section seems a bit segregated from the rest of the article; perhaps it could be put into the hardware (the PS3's hardware has also been used to... lead?) Also, I'd prefer the hardware to come before software, as you talk about the SKUs and it seems logical to follow with a more thorough discussion of the guts. Once you've finished sourcing, page me and I'll do a final check and prolly give it a GA... then I would say go for the FAC. Great job!

P.S. Thanks for the comments over at the Halo 3 FAC. If the PS3 ends up at the docket, I'll be keeping me eyes peeled. :) David Fuchs^(talk) 00:05, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The VG Barnstar

		The VG Barnstar
		For all the edits you have contributed to improving video game related articles. Silver Edge (talk) 17:28, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Thanks

Don't mention it. I figured you would have done the same for me if you had the chance. Peace! SWik78 (talk) 00:30, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hello Thingg, I have granted rollback rights to your account. The reason for this is that, after a review of some of your contributions, I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended use of reverting vandalism: I do not believe you will abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. I saw your name appear on a page I have on my watchlist, and after seeing that you perform a lot of vandal-fighting, mainly by using the undo feature, it would be a benefit for you to have rollback. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck.

Wikipedia:New admin school/Deleting/delete is the place to test rollback, by the way. Acalamari 01:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about "grantation", but I know that "granting" is a word. :) Don't worry about that revert, it was a mistake, no harm done. You're welcome for rollback. Acalamari 01:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spam in PlayStation 3 games

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on PlayStation 3 games, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because PlayStation 3 games is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting PlayStation 3 games, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 21:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PlayStation 3 games

A tag has been placed on PlayStation 3 games, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Sawblade05 ⁽^{talk to me} ^| ^{my wiki life}⁾ 21:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am already disputing the result but you might want to take note of it. The tag on that page was placed by an Annoymous IP. Sawblade05 ⁽^{talk to me} ^| ^{my wiki life}⁾ 21:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to "subst:" certian templates on talk pages

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When using certain templates on talk pages, as you did to User talk:68.198.178.134, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:uw-test1}} instead of {{uw-test1}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Thank you. Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 04:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of video games

Hi. Thanks for the useful comments on my talk page. I didn't realise that the whole "Seventh Generation" thing originated from Wikipedia - it seems to be quite a unique case of Wikipedia providing its own material rather than taking information from other sources! Anyway, if there is no citation available from outside, is it ok just to leave it without one or should there be some sort of system to self-reference to a wikipedia discussion/page etc? Thekoyaanisqatsi (talk) 12:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help

Thanks for taking a moment to fix my user page after this vandal edit. I had just cleaned up an identical mess before signing off. Ah, my first user page vandalizations! *sniff!* I feel like I belong now! Matt Deres (talk) 15:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

65.41.92.42

Is pissed at you. Be advised. Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 03:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, Okay man. Have a good one! Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 15:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Silent Hill 4

I just wanted to point out that the diary references are not those of the protagonist (Henry), but of a supporting character (Joseph). If this is unclear in the article, let me know so I can fix it. Thank you for your support regardless --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 04:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stephenville, Texas article vandalized!

Someone vandalized that article. the UFO info is gone, except for the catagory. A IP done it. 65.163.113.170 (talk) 07:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mythology.

Did you revert the vandalism with huggle, or manually? · AndonicO ^Hail! 18:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you're pretty fast... I asked because huggle is making every other vandalism reversion method obsolete; I tried to rollback manually but you beat me, so I accused huggle. :P · AndonicO ^Hail! 18:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly request

Hello. This is just a friendly request asking you to preview and proof-read your edits when updating heavily used templates. Veryone would appreciate it [1]. Thanks! --Kralizec! (talk) 02:18, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I am a terrible speller myself (hense why I did not notice the mistake when I reviewed the edit from my watchlist), so it took a better speller to point it out. --Kralizec! (talk) 02:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PlayStation 3

Good job on getting the PlayStation 3 article to Featured article status. Happy editing! --Silver Edge (talk) 04:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Libel and Defamation

You cannot libel nor defame a deceased person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.100.177.17 (talk) 04:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More importantly to me, it was cited, and it seems to be true; more discussion on the article talk page.--Prosfilaes (talk) 13:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Congrats

And the same to you for PlayStation 3! David Fuchs^(talk) 21:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vandal Blocking

Why thanks for noticing. I've only come across this vandal once. Anyway, have a nice shut eye :) Spellcast (talk) 06:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This was brought up at Wikipedia:ANI#Rangeblock_needed. A temporary range block was done and hopefully it works out. I'm aware of his socks but I've only blocked one of them. Spellcast (talk) 21:07, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the shiny star, it's really appreciated! Spellcast (talk) 08:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey fellas, how's it hangin?

Re:Question

I would say maybe GFDL or fair use, but you might want to get a second opinion, because I'm not 100% sure. jj137 (talk) 12:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Question

Probably, the svg would be considered a derivative work and thus wouldn't be allowed. However, since its on an educational site, I suggest you contact the author/creator of the image and request that it be used with permission. For example, I contacted the author of Image:Chicxulub-animation.gif and she allowed its use as long as express credits were provided in the image thumbnail caption. (NASA has a similar requirement). David Fuchs^(talk) 01:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Xbox 360

No problem, any help would be great. Thanks for correcting my spelling errors, I didn't realize I sent that out yet, but I re-did it and it looks good now. Yeah any help would be great. Welcome to the project. --Blackwatch21 (talk) 04:44, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the project, I deal with the project page only right now. Blackwatch is handling the portal page, so you will need to talk to him about the portal. The only things I diff. want on the portal page is: news, featured article and game. I also would like to have a featured article from the portal on the project site as well. Look foward to working w/ you. Regards DJS --DJS24 (talk) 15:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think the article should have it's own design, however only the article. I want to keep the rest page under the normal format. I'm looking to have the article under the console section and above the Games section. Let me know if you need help. Thanks DJS--DJS24 (talk) 16:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Could you explain me the reason why the Image can't be used on the userbox User:Neoarchon/PSN Tag??

Correct me if i'm worng but i had the idea that if an image is hosted on wikipedia under the fairuse tag it can be used anywhere within wikipedia.

Neoarchon Talk 14:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for your reply Neoarchon Talk 16:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Portal Xbox 360

I put the portal page back to my way. I like the beginning , news and help box you had. But I like my articles my way. If there is a way to have both you're more than welcome to do it.--Blackwatch21 (talk) 16:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked Blackwatch to add your name as one of the developer(s) of the portal site. As I see you have contributed a lot to the page and I hope you continue too. I liked both of Blackwatch's and your's design, but I think it will look better if you add both ideas together. With your design on top, w/ the articles below. Just a thought. Thanks DJS --DJS24 (talk) 17:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]