Misplaced Pages

User talk:Arcayne: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 08:00, 16 October 2007 editV-train (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers4,130 edits == Die cruft die ==: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 08:01, 16 October 2007 edit undoV-train (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers4,130 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 156: Line 156:
It's worth discussing, but ultimately, in the face of the current project through the project, minor. For now, until we shape up the articles and substantiate the characters via various interviews, I think it's minor. thanks for asking though, I posted a longer explanation at the talk page. ] 03:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC) It's worth discussing, but ultimately, in the face of the current project through the project, minor. For now, until we shape up the articles and substantiate the characters via various interviews, I think it's minor. thanks for asking though, I posted a longer explanation at the talk page. ] 03:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


== == Die cruft die == == == Die cruft die ==


*My apologies, send me the cleaning bill. I'm not going to pay it, but I promise to laugh at it heartily. Oh, and can you tell me when the next meeting of CruftEaters Anonymous is? ] 08:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC) *My apologies, send me the cleaning bill. I'm not going to pay it, but I promise to laugh at it heartily. Oh, and can you tell me when the next meeting of CruftEaters Anonymous is? ] 08:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 08:01, 16 October 2007

This user values third opinions and occasionally provides one.
Caveat
This user reserves the right to be more fun than you.
File:Skull logo.jpg CruftEater™ Local 665
Eating cruft since 2007






Howdy!
Click here to leave a new message.
Rude messages will be deleted at my whim.


Archive
♦My Spellbook♦
(Or, "How I Learned to Stop Hatin' & Love All the Crazy")
Arc 000
Arc 001
Arc 002
Arc 003
Arc 004

Arc 005
Arc 006
Arc 07
Archive 8
Archive 9
Archive 10
Archive 11
Archive 12
Archive 13
Archive 14
Archive 15
Archive 16
Archive 17
Archive 18
Archive 19
Archive 20
Archive 21
Archive 22
Archive 23
Archive 24
Interlude: Textboxes

What was archived

Midnighter

Nah, it's cool, I understand. I agree that you shouldn't have removed that source I added. Conversely, I shouldn't have removed that tag you placed on the JLA reference, as that was one I should've left in, but neglected to do so. There is also some other unsourced material that I've attempted to source, and yet other that I simply removed. Unfortunately, although I've read some of the comics that would source some of this stuff, I don't own them, so I was only able to satisfy some of those tags. Thanks for collaborating with me. :-) Nightscream 22:22, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm.....now that you mention it, it doesn't seem like the sort of info to place in the Intro, especially since most of it is already mentioned in the Vital Statistics section. Must be an off day for me, because I usually would've noticed that myself. I removed that from the Intro, and put some of it in the VS section. Thanks again. Nightscream 06:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Confused

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. Mind, I've just woken up. Is this a particular article? Maybe if I saw what was going on I'd be able to think of what I'd do.~Zythe 10:29, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

You're not wrong. To start with, here are some references to the Batman parallel.~Zythe 14:34, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


Butcher Cover

Arc, Check out my discussion page about the Butcher Cover. I think you'll agree with me on this one. This person is bent on calling the top caption of the picture of the butcher cover "the Alternate Cover." I worded it as the Original Cover Design. Sixstring1965 16:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Arcayne, if you think my change from "Original release cover design" to "Original cover" for the reasons stated in my edit summary needs to be discussed on the talk page, by all means discuss it there. My failure to do so is not by itself grounds for reversal. Adding a rationale for an edit in the edit summary is perfectly acceptable practice. --PEJL 19:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Arc, Plesse keep an eye on my discussion. This one doesn't get it. I think you understand exactly where I'm coming from on this one.Sixstring1965 21:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

IMDb

General WP:V and WP:RS. We cannot verify their information, as it comes from editors who submit it. There may be something about over at WP:FILMS, or WP:MOSFILMS, but I'm not sure.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:51, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

You might be looking for WP:CIMDB, perhaps? It was a rejected proposal for how to use IMDb. Like Bignole said, you can argue against IMDb in failing to be a reliable source with the way it accepts new content. —Erik (talkcontrib) - 02:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
And about Frater210, if you weren't aware, check out the resulting incident report Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Attempted harassment measures. —Erik (talkcontrib) - 02:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure if I understand; what was the result of the checkuser request? Did the contributions of the sockpuppet not reflect knowledge of how to file a 3RR despite being new, which should raise concerns about the "newness" of the account? —Erik (talkcontrib) - 04:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, The Seeker bombed so badly at the box office. I guess all the POV-contributing fanboys were right that the adaptation would be FUBAR. :) —Erik (talkcontrib) - 04:46, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Replace Schumacher with Uwe Boll, and I agree wholeheartedly. —Erik (talkcontrib) - 18:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Question about the Gathering kick-off

Hm, actually, no, I can't. The season 1 booklet only says that "the very existence of this series is somewhat incongruous with the ending of the first film," and there's Joe in "The Watchers" telling Duncan, "your kinsman Connor MacLeod, he did us all a big favor when he got rid of him," and that's about all I can find about The Kurgan in the series, to the best of my knowledge. In season 1, from the pilot onwards, it's pretty obvious to everyone in the series that it is the Gathering and nothing in particular triggered it; again, to the best of my knowledge. I'm gonna remove that sentence. Thanks for pointing this out to me, and have a nice day. Rosenknospe 11:07, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Heavy Brother

The only person still keeping this alive is you. That user did exactly what I told them to: ceased using that account immediately upon finding out that it was not allowed as a single-purpose account. There have been no contributions since 9/25 from that account. This matter is closed. There is no further need for you to keep this alive. - Philippe | Talk 14:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Lennon

I cropped it from a current commons image using photoshop so it shouldn't be a problem. I'm only too aware of our image policy trust me!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 09:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I didn't even look at the licensing. Judging by how tough the Commons are on images I figured if it wasn't a legitimate image it would have been deleted by now ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 19:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

It states the source is from http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/index-e.html where taken by the government it has been released into the public domain. Now you may want to verify this, really the commons should have sorted this image by now and to decide whether it is valid. I just cropped what I saw as a commons image last night to try to improve the article of the great John Lennon. Perhaps I was dreaming about shagging Lucy Pinder in the sky with diamonds too much!!! (Diamonds being used to fuel my Kreblakistani laser beam to extertiminate the white house) I would ask Videmus who did a lot with images but I think he has left wikipedia temporarily. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 19:58, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I think the commons are always very strict on removing images where it is clear we cannot use them. I guess they were tagged that way for a reason as probably admin on there were indecisive either way. out of courtesy I just replicated what was there before to avoid any misunderstanding. Now I have to go back to shagging Lucy Pinder in the magma in my volcano. All the best, Adios ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 20:01, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

OH indeed they are all very fit. Eva Longoria, etc etc. Note though I do like my pussy to be white and fluffy though (if you catch my Mr. Bigglesworth drift). LOL! Natalie Portman had to be about the only woman in the world who didn't look terrible with a baldy. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 20:15, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

P.S top stuff on the 300 film. It is a great article. Best regards baldy ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 20:18, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Another image of Lennon. I happened to be readin the John Kerry article has came across an unlikely image of him with Lennon. So I cropped and enhanced it ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 13:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

File:Lennon72.jpg

Yes it could do with some photoshop work it wasn't the clearest of images anyway but a good find nonetheless and a significant one in relation to his anti war major involvement. I have always found John Kerry decent - much better than that weasel George W. As my mother always said Never trust a guy with slitty eyes! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 14:02, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

The Blair Witch Project

Maybe mention it on the talk page of the article next time? ;-) -- JediLofty 14:50, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Heroes template

I think this may be what you want - not sure though. I didn't know you're part of the Heroes project as well; how long have you been here? asyndeton 16:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I need the one that shows the html coloring scheme. I cannot seem to find it anywhere... - Arcayne () 17:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Heroes Infobox.

Not sure what you're asking for. Do you mean something like:"Where in the template code do I find the codes for colors so I can change them from something pretty and graphic-designy to something staid and encyclopedic", or do you mean, where is, among all the tempaltes for Heroes WIkiproject, the one that's black and white, so I can invert it? If the former, I think they use HTML color codes, which are six characters long alphanumeric strings, look for those; of the other, find the template box title and search for it wit hthe 'templates' category checked. Hope this helps, and if I understand yoru description, yeah, good change to make, thought the colors are, i suspect, menat to parallel the eclipse symbol of the show. ThuranX 22:52, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

going one further, would this diff achieve your goal? if not, please revert ASAP so as not to cause mass confusions. ThuranX 22:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Heroes infobox

Since you're now one of the troops, perhaps you can help me with an issue similar to one we had in HP. If you look at, for example, Claire Bennet's infobox, you can see that it's being used to hold far too much information. In HP we eventualy cut it down to the bare essentials, but when I brought it up here, I didn't get a response. I'm not terribly esatblished within the community, so I didn't want to make such drastic edits without consensus, but two of us should hold some leverage. Thanks. asyndeton 10:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for not helping you out; I would have, if I'd logged in sooner. Personally I think we should lose anything related to family from the infobox; I agree it's important in the series and needs to covered in the article but I don't think the infoboxes can do it justice, plus this info clutters them up quite badly. Perhaps, like in HP, we could create family trees, accompanied by some prose, in a separate section?
I don't think 'Occupation' deserves to stay either and 'Aliases' seems a bit crufty to me. 'Real name' also seems a bit OTT as not that many characters use aliases (indeed do we need to state that 'Matthew Parkman' is the real name of 'Matt Parkman'?).
As for the image caption, I think it would suffice to say 'Peter Petrelli <br>as portrayed by Milo Ventimiglia</br>' or something to that effect; I think mentioning which episode the image is taken from or whether or not it is a promotional photo is unnecessary. What do you reckon? asyndeton 15:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
I whole heartedly agree; I'll bring it to the Wikiproject:Heroes talk page now. asyndeton 19:40, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Arcayne, you went through and changed "portrayer" to "actor" for all the Heroes characters. However, the "Actor" category doesn't show up on the page. Ophois 04:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

The simplest way to fix it would be to change "Actor" back to "portrayer" on their pages.Ophois 23:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
No, I meant change "Actor" back to "Potrayer". "Actor" doesn't correspond with anything in the infobox, whereas "Portrayer" does. Ophois 05:44, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Another Happy Product of our educational system

Block me, I don't care. A worthless excuse for a cunt like Ann Coulter deserves derogatory comments about her posted anywhere possible, whether factually, socially, politically, legally correct or not.
I dont know or care what "BLP" is but I sincerely hope hers suffers as much as possible. I have done my share of factual corrections, and wikipedia's integrity is publically trashed anyways, whether deservedly so or not. So a deserving, although perhaps "incorrect," addition is no serious faux pas in my mind.
And when the hell did wikipedia become a damn "online community," a la MySpace. It took me far too long to realize that messages between users were possible. The idea was so repugnant that I failed to consider it for awhile. I appreciate your time, your opinion is of (some) value to me, your thinly veiled and completely harmless "threats" are not. Regards, Zachary —Preceding unsigned comment added by FulMetlJakit (talkcontribs) 07:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Ann Coulter

Excuse me? Did you inadvertently scoop me up among the half-dozen mischievous editors' comments you swept aside? Observing from the other side of the world from the USA in Australia, as I do, where Ms Coulter's commentary is observed from a disinterested distance on YouTube, such commentary as that of Ann Coulter has to be taken as humorous. (Dire and satiric, to be sure, but humorous all the same.) Is it in your view vandalism so to characterise it?! Masalai 08:12, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Ann Coulter vandalism

Please stop. You comments to the article of a BLP are not appropriate or appreciated. You are an experienced editor who knows what vandalism is, and what the penalty for vandalism is. Knock it off, or face the repercussions. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 06:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I hadn't actualy considered the fact that the Outback might consider a Grand Pretender, like Stephen Colbert. She isn't. She apparently means what she says, and there is very little comedy about it. Perhaps you might have gleaned this from the fact that you changed the lead from political commentator or whatever to comedian/comedianne.
I'm rather hoping you are demonstrating a rather bone-dry sense of wit instead of being clueless as to Coulter's actual gig. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 08:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh please. Our political commentary in jurisdictions (Australia? Canada? Ireland? Israel? India?) where we have "responsible government" and the head of government must daily submit to Question Time in the lower house of Parliament is assuredly more lively than it now is in the USA where the Third Estate is so abjectly supine. But Ms Coulter brings to the currently pathetic American debate an element of absurdity which all Americans must surely welcome: she is indeed not a serious commentator but a comedienne: do you not see that? Misplaced Pages has now progressed beyond being a purely USA phenomemon: kindly note that USA politics are also the deep concern of the whole world.Masalai 09:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Anne Coulter and Supposed Flame Members

Hi, it's I the noob Mortello. Anyway, being here is enjoying, but excuse the aggressive responses. Although I don't cause trouble, I have a tendency of defending those I advocate, agressively, and that in turn may come off a bit too much when I get worked up. Anyway, I think I may or may not have done it again with the supposed flames, but now that I got your message, I know what to do. This time, rather than attacking, I'll try to keep the arguement strictly about the arguement rather than the member themself. Still, if a member uses a famous qoute that helps describe the person with accuracy, would that be so wrong? Mortello 21:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Children of Men

The admin Alkivar has unilaterally removed non-free images from Children of Men and Fight Club (film) with no attempt at discussion. The non-free images had fair use rationales attached, and the admin just decided of his own accord that the rationales were not sufficient. I've brought up the issue at WikiProject Films and am considering filing an incident report regarding his conduct, which is reminiscent of a similar brusque admin at 300 (film). —Erik (talkcontrib) - 17:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd rather have the admin explain why he decided to delete the images so abruptly. That's why I brought up the issue of Children of Men with you and Viriditas - I know that that particular film article had a lot of time and energy invested in it, same with Fight Club (film) on a more personal note. It just seems, well, rude to have them go *poof*. I'm all for making articles better, but I'd rather collaborate with an admin rather than mutter at his holier-than-thou conduct and attempt to figure out what would please Him. I've tried to do that with Fight Club (film) with four screenshots to gauge his actions for images that seem to have pretty solid fair use rationales for all but the most stringent editors. —Erik (talkcontrib) - 23:58, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
From this: "You may wish to get a second opinion as i'm one of the more lenient admins when it comes to fair use." Scary! :( Imagine someone more stringent than him or ol' Ed of 300 fame... I'm shivering in my galooshes. He basically OK'd the Fight Club images and didn't consider the Sunshine cast one so beneficial. —Erik (talkcontrib) - 00:14, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

HP

Hi, I only recently noticed that you reverted my edits to Harry Potter (character). I've left a comment on that article's talk page discussing my feelings, if could please take a look and reply. Thanks. Paul730 09:05, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

heroes and powers

It's worth discussing, but ultimately, in the face of the current project through the project, minor. For now, until we shape up the articles and substantiate the characters via various interviews, I think it's minor. thanks for asking though, I posted a longer explanation at the talk page. ThuranX 03:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Die cruft die

  • My apologies, send me the cleaning bill. I'm not going to pay it, but I promise to laugh at it heartily. Oh, and can you tell me when the next meeting of CruftEaters Anonymous is? V-train 08:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC)