User talk:Sesshomaru/Archive 8

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

< Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9 >

Re: Yoruichi

Category:Fictional werecats is categorized under Category:Fictional shapeshifters. Until such time that she turns into something other than a cat, werecat is the best category for her. And I don't know where to look up conception-related stuff about her. Given that she's not a recurring/main character, I wouldn't get my hopes up on finding any. ~Snapper T o 05:10, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I think VIZ uses "Yoruichi Shihoin" in the anime; I do not know how the name is romanized in the manga. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shinobu Sensui

VIZ uses "Shinobu Sensui" - I just found that out. WhisperToMe (talk) 06:48, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

YuYu Hakusho episode lists

Just dropping a line, as you commented on the episode lists on my talk page, that the FLCs for all four season lists have been running over ten days with three supports each and no outstanding objections. Regards, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm asking you to comment on them, whether support, oppose, or other comments, given that they've been sitting there for quite a while with three supports and no opposes, and I want them to be resolved. If you oppose, then I will be happy to address your complaints. The reason I'm addressing this message to you is that you commented on the episode lists on my talk page, and I inferred that you would be interested in their progress. Regards, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 19:59, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. As for Quincy (Bleach), the categories you placed are fine, and the copy-editing is nice as well. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see it, but I'm unaware what is actually causing it. The only things with a "|-" are in the media section far below the infobox. You can place a request at the Wikipedia:Help desk, and someone more adept in these matters can take care of it. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's never really "flying" per se (at least to the reader's perception, see here and here), but the anime makes it pretty clear that his feet aren't on the ground. I think the category is fine. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cyberhawk241 ~~

Yeah. He's certainly combative about his edits for whatever reason, and openly denounces any discussion or help. Papacha (talk) 06:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's blocked at the moment, due to his deletion & copy-paste of pages. He was already warned a couple of times not to do so, so it seems par for the course for his attitude thus far. Papacha (talk) 11:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beelzebub (Sand Land) ON HOLD

I have placed the Beelzebub article on hold. Please refer to the talkpage for more details. FamicomJL 23:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the delay. I didn't, I've just been busy lately, the Christmas season SUCKS. >.<. But yes, the rationales are correct, and it's now a Good Article. I'm about to pass it and such as we speak. Regards. FamicomJL (talk) 01:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of YuYu Hakusho episodes FLC

Just dropping a line that the FLC nomination for List of YuYu Hakusho episodes has exceeded its ten day limit. Comments would be highly welcome. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 16:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did I miss anything?

It's SUIT. I was gone a few months (temporary retirement). Anyways, you keep a watch on the Dragon Ball articles, right? Did I miss anything, like new guidelines, articles, merges, etc?--C. ROSS 22:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so I didn't miss anything. I just wanted to know, before I did something stupid. I just felt like starting over, so I created a new account. Thanks--C. ROSS 04:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

YuYu Hakusho FTC

I've nominated the five YuYu Hakusho episode lists for featured topic status here. Feel free to read up on the featured topic criteria and comment as you see fit. Furthermore, if you wish to comment at Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Naruto manga chapters, another topic nomination I have there, then feel free, as it's been sitting there for ages. Thanks, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 08:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong Project template addition

You seem to have added a number of the templates to such articles as those on the 6809 and 68k CPUs. These seems to be in error. There is a brief discussion at the Hong Kong Project discussion page. As you're more familiar with your reasons for the template additions, I thought it a good idea to query first. Otherwise, I'll go 'round attemping to repair some of the problem. ww (talk) 08:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother, but...

Given your interest in the Powers and Abilities of the Hulk page, is there any chance you could help to permanently get rid of the relentless vandal User:Darrell37. He obviously wants attention, since his lies are so transparent regarding explicitly quoted matter-of-fact bits, but he's turning annoying. His only goal at Wikipedia seems to be to vandalise, and given his use of multiple Ip-numbers/sockpuppets to make the same edits over and over he is like the old multiple sockpuppet-user User:JJonz who has been a compulsive nuisance previously, and seems to have turned into a personal stalker for some reason. I don't know if I should be flattered or worried. Help would be very appreciated in any case.

I also have similar problems at Odin (Marvel Comics), Galactus and Power Cosmic, with User:Manssiere, but here it is not nuisance-trolling so much as unreasonable view-pushing. Dave (talk) 10:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help with Manga article

I saw that you're making much needed small but important changes in the text, and I just want to express my thanks and appreciation for the effort. Sooner or later we'll get this #$%^ article up to GA. Do you know anyone who could rewrite the publication section, especially the dojinshi part? There's still a lot of unreferenced material in that section. I have a bunch of references I can share with people, but I can't do the rewriting myself. Timothy Perper (talk) 21:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

The images of the ones you believe are non-notable can be removed. I reverted your edit no because you removed the images, but because you removed their character sections as well. WP:DBZ's policy on non-notable characters affects the articles of the characters in questions (such as a King Vegeta article for King Vegeta). However the policy, or consensus, does not affect the character's mention on a list article. Hope that clears it up.-- bulletproof ^3:16 02:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't exaggerate things. The reason we have these lists is for characters that would normally not be notable to have their own articles. -- bulletproof ^3:16 02:08, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use of rollback

Hi, say I saw you were granted the new rollback tool. As you probably know it's use is strictly limited to vandalism. With that in mind, I came across this edit [1], it doesn't look like vandalism to me, can you tell me if you rolled back the edit because it was vandalism? Thanks,

Thanks for the note, the tool is to be used for vandalism only. To quote: Rollback should only be used to revert vandalism and should never be used to revert good faith edits or in content disputes. Please limit it's usage to roll back vandalism....thanks! RxS (talk) 04:54, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant part of the quote is should never be used to revert good faith edits. The edits were not obviously vandalism and were pretty clearly good faith...not great copy editing to be sure but they were not vandalism. RxS (talk) 05:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saito Hajime and Rurouni Kenshin

"(cur) (last) 18:04, 11 January 2008 Sesshomaru (Talk | contribs | block) (8,067 bytes) (Japanese wiki gives this name. And rewrote top per WP:WAF guidelines and... other stuff) (undo)"

No. We have chosen to use family name-given name order with Rurouni Kenshin because it takes place during the Meiji era. Notice how the other characters are Himura Kenshin, Kamiya Kaoru, etc.

WhisperToMe (talk) 21:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the English manga the names are in Japanese order. In the English anime the names are in Western order.

We are using the manga convention.

The nihongo is correct - Saito is a family name and Hajime is a given name. Fujita is a family name and Goro is a given name. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OH, I SEE. For some funky reason Udo Jin-e's kanji was in there. I'd have to see if I did that or someone else did that. Either way, I fixed it. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is what happened - This started as an article on Udo Jin-e and then some guy moved the article and renamed it as... Saito Hajime? WhisperToMe (talk) 22:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check the redirects to see if I missed any. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We are using the Japanese order names, as they are used in the English-language manga version of Rurouni Kenshin. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

Hi Sesshomaru,

Why are you continuing an edit war on a number of articles? Please stop and join the discussion on WP:AN/I. Firsfron of Ronchester 02:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The exact heading is Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Edit_warring_on_episodes_articles. Edit summaries like "See WP:EPISODE, an afd is not required for cases like these" also concern me. Any massive purge of content should be discussed first, and WP:EPISODE is only a guideline, and it never trumps actual policy. Best, Firsfron of Ronchester 02:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response, Sesshomaru. Being strongly in favor of WP:EPISODE is great, but it is only a guideline, and you can't go around doing massive reverts of other editors' work and telling them to read WP:EPISODE for an explanation why, because the guideline there isn't a policy, and TTN didn't follow the guideline anyway: the guideline states "If the article(s) contain little content, consider merging or redirecting them into another article (e.g. an article about the show itself, an article that is a list of episodes of the show, or an article that summarizes the plot for one season of the show). To start this process, tag the article(s) with {{notability|episode}} on the page." There's no way TTN was making a rational decision regarding these articles: he was redirecting them at up to 8 per minute, which isn't long enough to read or even skim them.

On the RFAr page, you stated you've only done one revert, but what you actually did was one revert on each of 16 articles, and all you were doing was reverting what the last editor did, in its entirety, in reverse order (there are no articles that were not reverted to the previous version). There is no way that you were checking what you were doing; you were just going through and undoing each and every edit without discussion. That is absolutely edit warring. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:16, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I should have been more specific during the arb statement. But really, I don't see anything wrong with sticking sturdily by guidelines. I reviewed those episodes briefly and immediately noticed a lack of aspects from WP:WAF. They also did not fully meet the criteria for what a page should contain and plot summaries. Way I see it, it is perfectly okay to merge articles until in-universe matters are settled and real world data is found, hence, I believe an WP:AFD may only result with a loss of information, or a bunch of obsessed "keepers". What upset me the most was how Casliber utilised the rollback tool; TTN did not vandalize anything, in fact, he is trying his best to improve the encyclopedia by redirecting the messy pages. It's a sad shame that there are obsessed fanboys who just can't let go, and that gets me pissed. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:38, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sesshomaru,

Thanks for your calm and rational tone throughout this conversation. I don't support the use of rollback for non-vandalistic edits, and I agree that many of those articles may not have met the criteria for the WP:EPISODE guideline. However, when someone does a mass purge of content and bases that purge on a guideline, it's worrisome. You are in effect deleting a ton of other users' content without discussion or warning, and you aren't putting the content anywhere else (such as on the talk page, or in another article). Merging and purging are not the same thing at all. What you were doing was purging tons of content without discussion.

You've characterized Casliber's actions as those of an "obsessed keeper", and as those of an "obsessed fanboy" with OWNership issues. In fact, I don't think Cas has worked on any of those articles, so it doesn't much seem to be him being upset that "his" work was lost so much as he was upset to see the work of countless other editors' work being "merged" (actually purged) out of existence without discussion, warning, or even a tag (which is what the guideline itself says to do). If you want others to follow a guideline, you have to follow it yourself. And mass deletions, even on XfD, almost never go over well. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:57, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely understand where you're coming from. You're a good user who doesn't deserve a lot of grief for a momentary mistake. Best, Firsfron of Ronchester 05:10, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Arbitration

I have filed a request for arbitration which involves you. Please see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#The_Television_Episodes_Edit_Wars. John254 02:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Naruto Uzumaki PLOT

I saw you have tagged the plot overview, but I also noticed you work in the Son Goku (Dragon Ball) article that has a similar way of plot overview but it hasnt been tagged. What does the article of Naruto Uzumaki needs to delete that tag without making it so long? Please answer me. It is also a strange that the tag says "see talk page" but there is no discussion.Tintor2 14:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As soon as I wrote it I realized and corrected the sign. Was that the question?.Tintor2 22:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.Tintor2 12:33, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, sorry to bother but I need help with something. Today I edited in Himura Kenshin reception a comment about IGN but there is a problem with the cite web title. Can you check it please? Thanks.Tintor2 15:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. I dont know about samurais but it is mentioned that Kenshin technically was never a samurai. He has been called murderer and swordman but he was called samurai in chapter from volume 25 but in a spiritual way.Tintor2 16:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes.Tintor2 16:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, to everything.Tintor2 16:34, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I need to ask you something, do you know any website that may contain rurouni kenshin reviews at least to make bigger the reception? I looked in activeanime but I didnt find anything there. Also another website you can tell me about toys apart from amazon since there are a large number of toy about kenshin. Well, see you.Tintor2 10:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So do you think they shouldnt be added?Tintor2 13:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!Tintor2 13:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I think in doing that but in my opinion Seta Sojiro Himura Kenji and Yukishiro Tomoe should be merged for their short development. Maybe Saito Hajime (Rurouni Kenshin) should also be merged since he is based in a real person Saito Hajime.Tintor2 13:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I ll keep later with the Kamiya Kaoru article. See you.Tintor2 15:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I based the article of kenshin from the one of Sasuke Uchiha. I suppose we can also add the websites critic of kenshin in the top. Lets hope Sephiroth or Snapper2 dont sue us (lol).Tintor2 16:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I know, maybe repeating some references since the ones of sasuke and sakura repeated them and no problem..Tintor2 16:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ill do it later.Tintor2 16:44, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think it should be. About FA, I think its too soon for that, lets better wait to the end of the GA nomination (which seems to be a bit frozen).19:49, 9 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tintor2 (talk • contribs)

Yes, Ill change the capitals since Hitokiri Battosai is a title like Sharingan Kakashi so Ill add " ".Tintor2 (talk • contribs) 19:55, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everytime I do this message appears: "Sorry! We could not process your edit due to a loss of session data. Please try again. If it still doesn't work, try logging out and logging back in." I tried logging back but nothing happened. I ll try later. ".Tintor2 (talk • contribs) 20:02, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well now I could do it.Tintor2 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check this article: Battōsai. In my opinion it should be deleted since it is not a Historical Term..Tintor2 (talk • contribs) 9:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok about grammar I ll try to do something. My problem is that English is not my original langauage. I still dont know how to delete articles.Tintor2 (talk • contribs) 9:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I found the character sketches of the rurouni kenshin. I dont understand anything about japanese so if you know japanese or somebody who knows japanese can you check it? It may be helpful to the articles. The url is [[2]].Tintor2 (talk • contribs) 9:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Battosai is supposed to be an invented word (battou= take out the sword, sai=I think its fast or sth like that). I suppose it may be.Tintor2 (talk • contribs) 14:06, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Naruto Uzumaki

Hi. As you and User:Snapper2 are both toeing the WP:3RR line regarding the tagging of the Plot Overview section of this article for being too short, I'd like to strongly encourage you both to discuss the issue in the article talk page. As a fairly disinterested and neutral third party, I've started a topic there to help get the ball rolling. I've left a similar message on Snapper2's talk page as well to encourage him to do the same. Collectonian (talk) 20:30, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FA criteria for manga article

Over on the manga talk page, Nihonjoe asked if the manga article now meets the FA criteria. I expressed a few opinions and recommended getting more input. Can you comment about this? Timothy Perper (talk) 15:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been reverted by (to name a few) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [3]. --Maniwar (talk) 18:31, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tenjo Tenge and Sengoku-jidai

Tenjo Tenge has flashbacks to the warring states period, so it qualifies for the category. --tjstrf talk 05:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was nearly entirely absent from the project for the last few months, nobody was getting answers. Also, I'm in university now, so I don't have the massive amounts of free time I did until the last summer. Sorry if it seemed like I was ignoring you, I wasn't trying.

Anyway, the genres look effectively trimmed for all 4 of those pages, though I'd lean towards including supernatural for the Dragonball series articles as well, due to all the ki and magic elements that weren't explained via aliens and whatnot. --tjstrf talk 05:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Most Phallic Building contest

An article that you have been involved in editing, Most Phallic Building contest, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Most Phallic Building contest. Thank you. faithless (^speak) 08:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Son goku

Ok, you can change it. I only did it cos a GA character anime article had it.Tintor2 11:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editing user pages to remove red links and categories

I'm sorry for the slow response, I've just started a new job and have been very busy in real life. I don't think there's any kind of official policy about it ... I think it's OK provided that the edit summary is a link to the deletion discussion. Most people won't mind if they know why you are doing it, and you don't mess up anything. -- Prove It ^(talk) 14:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree

Were you the one who agreed with me about Plot overview sounding better than Part in the story on Naruto Uzumaki. Earthbendingmaster (talk) 20:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you were I thank you very much. Earthbendingmaster (talk) 20:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do. I was even asked to talk to the person who created the page(just because he created the page does not mean he owns it and improvements cannot be made). Earthbendingmaster (talk) 20:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would just like to thank you again about the help with Plot overview. Earthbendingmaster (talk) 15:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Earthbendingmaster (talk) 15:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You said you were watching my talk page. I just want to make sure. Earthbendingmaster (talk) 00:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for helping me in that discussion on my talk page. Earthbendingmaster (talk) 03:46, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thats OK. Thank you. Earthbendingmaster (talk) 04:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I finally added userboxes on my user page. Is there a userbox that says you are part of the Bleach work group? Earthbendingmaster (talk) 18:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did not know you had the rollback feature. I was granted it yesterday. Earthbendingmaster (talk) 23:21, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. No problem. Earthbendingmaster (talk) 03:32, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, its been a while, whats been going on? I have seen your name in the history of several anime/manga articles. Keep up the good work. Cheers. Earth bending master 15:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you went through my contributions to find that? No, I haven't, what needs to be done? Earth bending master 18:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, should have specified, meant the unfinished portal. Thanks. Earth bending master 19:55, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if there were people to clean it up, it would make a good one, but since there is not, it probably does need deleted, I cannot give you a direct answer. Earth bending master 21:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need help?

Hi there. I saw your request for help on Cheeser1's talk page regarding an IP user. I am an admin - I may be able to provide some assistance here. Can you point me to the issues you're having with this user? — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BarnSakura for excellent edits

I hereby award you the Anime and Manga BarnSakura for your tireless efforts and remarkable civility in helping to bring the Dragonball Z articles into compliance with Wikipedia policy. Well Done! --Xymmax (talk) 21:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Magatsuhi

I distrust some of the edits at Magatsuhi but I don't know the thing to evaluate accuracy. Your username made me think you might be better suited to looking it over. Doczilla (talk) 05:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Serebii.net

Sorry to bother, but I thought Serebii.net was an official site, according to you it isn't. If this does indeed violate WP:FANSITE, then the links from the other pages, like Pikachu and Gary Oak to name a few, should be removed too. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Serebii.net official? It's was created by a fan, is updated by a fan, and is maintained by a fan. Definitely not an official website. Serebii.net has many small errors in it's information, which cause it to violate WP:V, WP:EL, and WP:RS. It may be a very good fansite, but it is a fansite nonetheless, and is no more official than Bulbapedia or Pokemopolis. MelicansMatkin (talk) 17:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We should put {{Serebiidex}} and {{Omnidex}} up for this deletion if this is the case. I thought those sites were ok because of the existence of these templates. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Serebiidex has been nominated for deletion at least twice before. I believe it has been kept for historical purposes. The Omnidex template was only created today, and I agree it should be nominated for deletion. Serebiidex should probably be nominated again, as there is now no need for it with the merged lists. MelicansMatkin (talk) 17:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Serebiidex

Template:Serebiidex has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — MelicansMatkin (talk) 18:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Omnidex

I've tagged Serebiidex for deletion; would you like to nominate Omnidex for deletion? MelicansMatkin (talk) 18:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. {^_^} Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now there's the matter of this image. What to do with it? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:56, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment, the consensus appears to say that the template will be deleted. If that occurs, the image will be tagged as orphaned and deleted within 7 days. MelicansMatkin (talk) 23:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interwikis in Templates

Hi,

Be careful when moving noinclude tags in templates. In that case it misdirected interwikis to fr: and nl: on all pages using this template. ~ Jean-Frédéric 01:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bulbasaur

Just curious. Would you say the bulbasaur species is a fictional species from pokemon or the bulbasaur species are a fictional species from pokemon. Hiding T 13:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About your recent comment

Oops sorry, I honestly didn't know that we are not even supposed to spell fix the comments. Sorry about that. UzEE!! 00:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of injunction relating to episodes and characters

The Arbitration Committee, in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2, have voted to implement a temporary injunction. It can be viewed on the case page by following this link. The injunction is as follows:

For the duration of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2, no editor shall redirect or delete any currently existing article regarding a television series episode or character; nor un-redirect or un-delete any currently redirected or deleted article on such a topic, nor apply or remove a tag related to notability to such an article. Administrators are authorized to revert such changes on sight, and to block any editors that persist in making them after being warned of this injunction.

As noted in the text of the injunction, this restriction is in effect until the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2 case is officially closed by a clerk, following a successful motion to close by the arbitrators. Please note that, for the purposes of enforcement (c.f. the final line of the text of the injunction), all parties in this case at the time of this message (link) have been notified of this injunction.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 02:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YuYu Hakusho characters

I actually felt that it was more important to do the minor ones first before the subpages got deleted, which they more-likely-than-not would have. If you wish to merge them, you can do so. I won't mind doing them, however, but I don't know when I'll be on again to do so. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk) 23:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

InuYasha and Date Formats

Hi, I noticed you have started making the dates more consistent in the InuYasha article (yay). I was curious, though, as to why you decided to go with the UK format of dd mmmm, yyyy instead of mmmm dd, yyyy? I've seen it both ways in anime/manga articles, so I wondered if there something in the MOS to dictate which is better, or is it is just left the the editor's preference? Collectonian (talk) 03:35, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AIV report

Hi, could you go to WP:AIV and clarify your report of 216.183.185.133 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) please. Thanks. CIreland (talk) 21:31, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you provide them to me, I will copy/paste them to AIV so that they can be reviewed by other admins, in case I'm just being stupid (a likely scenario). I looked at all the anon's contribs and couldn't find anything I thought was vandalism in February but then again I don't know anything about Japanese pop culture. CIreland (talk) 21:36, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-posted and replied at WP:AIV. CIreland (talk) 21:48, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Cloud and Sephiroth

Hi, I've just posted on Prince's talk page. While I understand the frustration that can come with this type of situation, I feel that a suitable resolution for both of you can be reached with minimal strife. I hope you will join us in a discussion that I would like to stay a neutral party in. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:35, 5 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Some comments (posted to both User talk:Sesshomaru and User talk:The Prince of Darkness)

Nobody has vandalised anything. All edits to Cloud Strife and Sephiroth (Final Fantasy) by both of you on 5 February were patently in good faith.
Both of you are at fault for not explaining your reverts on the articles' talk pages. Reverts of good faith edits should always be justified - automatic edit summaries generated by undoing are insufficient.
These are heavily edited articles that have a great deal of interested editors. Asking for other opinions on the talk pages would have been quickly effective and avoided all this nonsense.
Sesshomaru, if you strongly believe that the phrase "artwork by" is best then explain why on the talk pages.
The Prince of Darkness, if you strongly believe that the phrase "artwork by" is unsuitable then explain why on the talk pages.
Do not continue the edit war. Discuss.

CIreland (talk) 22:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about we take this to either Cloud's or Sephiroth's talk page, either one is fine with me. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Discussion has been started here: Talk:Sephiroth (Final Fantasy)/Archive 2#Caption. See you there. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Re:Things

It's the same information. Anyhow, I highly disagree with your GA nomination of Naruto, as it's not ready for a GA run, seeing as there's zero conception/development information, no information on the dozens of media that constitute the franchise, the reception is sparse, and even the in-universe sections could do with some sprucing up. I would recommend that you withdraw it, and if you wish for a GA run, then bring a discussion up and I will note what the article needs to have before such a run can be conceivably successful. By the way, I'm a bit concerned that an article you nominated for GA, Yamucha, passed, given that there are a number of problems with the article: the conception section appears to be nearly entirely original research, the other media section has no sources for the video games, and the reception section is composed of unreliable sources (blogs, fan sites, etc.). Heck, the grand majority of the references are fan sites or blogs, and I'm surprised the GA reviewer did not take note of this in his review. The article certainly isn't at the same quality level of say Sasuke Uchiha, Dante (Devil May Cry), or Soma Cruz, all GAs on fictional characters. While I'm not going to take the article to WP:GAR, I'd recommend you try to fix the problems I've outlined. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 19:29, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Naruto is a rather poor candidate. Aside from the missing production/conception/development section for the anime and manga, there's a complete lack of a media section. There's video games, OVAs, the collectible card game, and more that's not even touched upon. See Shakugan no Shana#Novels and adaptations, Strawberry Panic#Media, or Wolf's Rain#Media. Both of the examples you have (Bleach (manga) and Sailor Moon) include this. This alone fails the comprehensiveness requirement for GA. That and the prose is lacking in many places, the in-universe details are not fully fleshed out or adequate, there is poor referencing even there, and the reception section needs to be longer. Again, withdraw it. It doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of passing.

As for Yamucha, the grand majority of the sources are blogs or fan sites, which do not pass WP:RS. Practically all the references aren't formated per {{cite book}} or {{cite web}}, whichever is appropriate. More reliable sourcing is necessary, as well as prose fixing there and there.

And what first question? As I stated above, the conception data is largely the same information that's currently used in both articles. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 23:07, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re

I'm afraid the video has been removed by YouTube. I'll try uploading mine onto my account. Hopefully my account there won't get suspended. -- bulletproof ^3:16 19:57, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frieza Saga Expansion

I have been working to expand the Saiyan and Frieza saga articles. In the beginning of the Frieza Saga article, I believe there should be mention of the crew initially landing on the fake planet Namek. I couldn't remember specifics about the three episodes they were there so I was hoping you and I could work together on this. --Xander756 (talk) 20:32, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticing, but I think "saga" shouldn't be capitalized, unless there are official sources to say that it is. Otherwise, "saga" is just a descriptive common noun. Axem Titanium (talk) 05:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese television series category

Let's discuss this here; poor Masamage, we were invading his talkpage.

Anyway, by series I mean works that contain more than one episode and are broadcast on tv. Also, you wanted a description for this cat. What about this?

"This is a parent category for Japanese television series, therefore it is only for articles that fit in at least two of the subcategories listed below. If this is not the case, use the specific subcategory instead." Kazu-kun (talk) 00:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References fixed in manga article

I went through the list of references you wanted me to look at and fixed up a bunch. You'll find the whole list plus a brief description on the manga talk page. A number of them had been "formatted" by people who didn't know what they were doing, but some were left over from prior editors. There are a couple I have no idea how to handle. Anyway, hope it helps. If there are others you want me to look at, let me know.

I just noticed the comment immediately above. Would it be a good idea to get the manga article out of the GAC queue?

Timothy Perper (talk) 10:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help and friendship. They mean a lot to me—not that this damn article if going to be easy, but we'll get there. Let me know about the references. Timothy Perper (talk) 01:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]