I see that you reverted my edits in Dishonored's page i can assure you that Carvo can become a vigiliante if the players don't kill anyone in Dishonored, he only becomes an assassin if the players kill anyone in the game. 189.60.57.90 (talk) 01:58, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes i see, thats kinda odd when Empress says that, because the no-kill achievement says "Clean hands", when Corvo doesn't kill anyone in Dishonored he becomes kind like a vigilante which is much better because killing someone is not the solution. 189.60.57.90 (talk) 22:00, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I added "and is the archenemy of Batman" to the lead sentence and changed the end of the first paragraph so it reads "allowing the character to endure throughout the years." I thought it was out of place to mention something so vital, like Joker's role as Batman's archenemy, at the end of the paragraph. Other enemies of Batman are noted for their role early in the introductory paragraph. What do you think of the change? Alternately, mentioning Joker's role as Batman's archenemy can be a stand alone sentence after the lead sentence, or mentioned as a clause before the second sentence. JosephSpiral (talk) 02:25, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Plot: if the plot is not too complex, it can be lumped in with the gameplay; otherwise, put it in its own section. If necessary, the section should have subheadings for the story's setting, characters, and story. Avoid trivial details.
It looks like you added Batman and Psychology: A Dark and Stormy Knight to sources cited in Joker (comics) a long time ago. Under Sources, the page correctly says the book came out in 2012. All the notes, though, say Langley 2013. Noticing the inconsistency nagged at me, but I felt I should not edit any notes anywhere regarding that book due to my complete conflict of interest. Doczilla@SUPERHEROLOGIST10:01, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A) Did not expect this announcement. B) Great title. C) If we can create a sequel section on Stick of Truth, we can redirect the new article there, as it would be more accurate. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:29, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I created a section though there isn't much info to go in. I was equally surprised, thought Stick would remain a solo title since there was never any talk about a sequel in any serious way. Fallout 4 is looking amazing too, been a long time since a good E3. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!22:34, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Great. Yeah. A lot of good stuff. Enjoyed the new Battlefront gameplay trailer, and hoping for some Kingdom Hearts 3 news/trailers tomorrow! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:43, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Arkham Knight
Also, just wanted you to know that I'll be unfollowing Arkham Knight on Monday at some point and will keep it unfollowed until I beat the game. Enjoy it when you get it! Have you preordered it anywhere specific to get the content they're offering? I'll be getting the Red Hood pack and all the PS4 exclusives, so can help with that content if you won't be getting it right away. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:40, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When there's hard work to do @Favre1fan93:, nobody panics, because it's all part of the plan and someone else will do it, but once the reviews come out, well everybody loses their minds! Never here to add anything substantial, but they're clearly watching the article because the second a review hits "I gotta post the score quick before time runs out". Oh and spoilers. Dicks. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!20:41, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Completely agree! So frustrating! It didn't help that IGN posted spoilerly stuff in their review, which is the thing I think you are talking about. I read Game Informer's review and they said there is a big twist players (hopefully) won't see coming, so I'm getting out now while I can to keep that a secret. I'll be back once I'm done. Hoping by next weekend, because I have all of Tuesday free to play it. At this point (sadly), I just feel, let the wildfire editors have their fun and then we can clean it up once we've completed it. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:23, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly what I'm talking about, IGN were HUGE dicks doing that, and someone has posted it in the article and I have no good reason to remove it apart from maybe WP:UNDUE. I at least broadened the description so as to not ruin the context for other editors. It'll be hard, but yeah, will just have to unfollow and fix it once I've completed the story alongside you. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!13:29, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm checking in while I can. Just removed a bunch of gameplay stuff that used unconfirmed video sources. The reception section doesn't seem too bad, just bad ref formatting (to our standards) and maybe a c/e. Hopefully it won't be a complete wreck by the time we get back. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:38, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'll just compare the diff between edits prior to the review releases and present, the hard part will probably be the gameplay section and reception. since people tend to typically just add quotes and scores (i haven't read through the section, I try to avoid reading anything too closely on that page at the minute), plus of course shifting and formatting the refs. We'll see what happens, plus the inevitable squabbling over the plot. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!20:57, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I just spent the past few hours cleaning up the article a bit in prep for the onslaught in the coming days, archiving and formatting all review refs. The reception section is not bad (surprisingly) for any spoiler-y material, if you so chose to want to do a touch up before Tuesday. We'll have to probably cut down on how much material is stated per reviewer, as it is a good amount for each now, but overall not as bad as it could have been. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:05, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And so you know, you can start with this diff once you fully get back on the page, as opposed to the one on Friday when the reviews started to get added. I've done a plethora of edits in the past 24hrs to get us to at least a good starting point, cleaning up the reception section and formatting, archiving, and replacing some refs if needed. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:37, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nice!!!! Just got back from my GameStop and in the process of downloading the 1.01 update, plus the Quinn, Red Hood, Scarecrow DLC and the PlayStation skins pack. I'll be doing this for at least another hour. Will fully dive into the game tomorrow and spend most of the day doing so! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:26, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I hope that you are both having an AWESOME time. Perhaps it is even better that you will be avoiding too much Wikidramaz while you are enjoying the game. Cheers to you both. MarnetteD|Talk04:35, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good so far, I've not experienced any of these PC issues, but then my PC wasn't cheap. I like the little twist, but I don't like the Batmobile combat at all, just strafing around firing at static targets. Boring as hell. Would rather they just used it as a means of transport and called it a day. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!21:53, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Enjoying it as well. Same thoughts on the Batmobile combat. Hate it and wish it was over everytime I have to do it. About 51% overall completed by the end of Tuesday, with I think about 60 or 70% on the main story (just finished the Harley part). Hoping to get more done tomorrow morning. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 06:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm nowhere near that far into it. Ace has just gone up, I've done the first Riddler map and I'm chasing after Barbara Gordon. The Arkham Knight is pretty lame and from the Eurogamer review, not worth the reveal. Thankfully, I'm here for Mr J. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!17:44, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah. Some good stuff there. Definitely enjoying the twist, as you have mentioned. It gets better and better as the game progress. And as of now, I'm about 64% overall done, 80 on the main story. I just had the whole day yesterday to play haha. Also by this point, it is painfully obvious who the Arkham Knight is and it just keeps getting dragged out. And fair warning, the Batmobile battle mode does not get any more enjoyable and all the side missions related to them (ie the ground bombs) are also frustratingly annoying and boring. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:25, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I haven't bothered with the bombs at all, boring stuff. I was expecting maybe one scarecrow sequence with the twist, but the ongoing thing is amazing and just really funny. If you haven't already go to Wayne Tower and listen to all the voice mail messages. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!22:16, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if the twist is in the Scarecrow Nightmare missions at all? I have not attempted any yet, but I can let you know once I do. And I was going to mention that to you before but forgot! I did listen; some good stuff. Also, once you get the remote hacker, use it in the clock tower. Cool Easter egg there and it also solves a Riddler riddle. So far, I'm really enjoying all the Riddler/Catwoman challenges, and the murder mystery side quest. I also read that the PC version may have actually been ported out to another developer of only 12 people? Something to keep our eyes out for to add (or clean up) in the article. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:34, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just finished the game. Really good. Ending was particularly good. There are three endings (based on what you've completed, side mission wise) and I've seen two of them. Mainly just all the Riddler content to go. Probably will get back on the page, see what's going on there. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:33, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The story so far has been really good, the Arkham Knight is a lame character and seems to exist more to justify the choice of game name, but everything with the recreation of comic stuff like Barbara's paralysis and Todd's death and the deconstruction of Batman's mind is great. I know Scarecrow isn't Joker but I don't think I've seen him in person since Ace Chemicals. But serious f' that tank battle with Arkham Knight. Felt like 30 minutes trying to hit set points on the Cloudburst tank that can instant gib your batmobile. Awful, awful idea. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!00:40, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah the Cloudburst tank battle was horrible. It was essentially, get behind, lock on, fire, quickly switch to regular mode and get the hell out of there if you could. Most of my issues with the Batmobile battles is there wasn't much context given for what to do. I don't want Rocksteady to and the answer to me on a plate, but at least have Alfred say something, like for the Cloudburst, initially, that you can't touch that one at all until you get the Cobras. We only learn that after beating all the Cobras. Ah well. The side missions with the bombs and such where we use the Battle mode are sort of growing on me, now that I have a better understanding of needed to strafe, fire at missiles, then use the 60mm to get the tanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:18, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. So the page isn't too bad. Still avoiding the plot section until I fully finish the game, but when you get on, areas to look at are the plot (obviously), the character section (I did a reformat for it, but we need sources for some of the characters and then VA; the credits for the game do not list actors to characters :'( ), the reception section, and PC issues section. All refs are formatted and archived for the info on the page per moi. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:53, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Right up to the end it was ok, but kinda fell apart then.
From the Duel Play Game Informer source: "Kevin Conroy reprises his role as Batman, and he’s joined by Jonathan Banks (Breaking Bad, Better Call Saul) as Commissioner Jim Gordon. Other allies include Ashley Greene (Twilight) as Barbara Gordon/Oracle and Scott Porter (Friday Night Lights, Hart of Dixie) as Nightwing." - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:46, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That was it, and I added it. Also, in the gameplay section, if we find sources, should we go indepth to all the side missions/the characters they were associated with? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:58, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah not the plot, but I was thinking more of the gameplay, like how we already have the Riddler stuff and the murder mysteries (which turned out to Pyg). So like saying, "Batman has to defuse bombs in the streets, stop roadblocks, save firefighters, etc." Or should we just be sticking to some of the side missions that had unique gameplay features? But I do like adding the very very brief description in the character section. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:06, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Which ending was that? I've only gotten the first two, working on the trophies, and haven't seen the final ending and/or credits if there are those again. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:29, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's apparently the 100% ending. I played like all day yesterday and cannot be bothered at all to chase down all of Riddler's puzzles to get the Knightfall protocol so I watched it on Youtube having gotten the major story stuff out of the way. He sings the song from Johnny Charisma's "boss battle" but sad because he's trapped. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!20:36, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So I just 100% the game. I heard the credits Joker song. Maybe if we can find a source for that and the one in game, we can mention it in the music section. That would be a good spot for it. Now to the Harley and Red Hood DLC and New Game+! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:50, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I contribute for the french wikipedia. Since few days, I'm translating this page Vampire: The Masquerade – Redemption. I think you added references i'm unable to find on the web :
Michael Wolf, Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption », PC Gamer, no 9, septembre 2000, p. 94 à 97.
Daniel Erickson, « Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption », Next Generation, no 8, août 2000, p. 84, 85.
T. Liam McDonald, « Games & Books - Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption », Games, no 164, octobre 2000, p. 57 (ISSN 0199-9788).
Could you help me ? do you have links that i can read this references ?
You can send me a PM if needed (if you have got scaned magazines), my mailbox is activated on my french page.
Great great great. Many thanks, I'm realy grateful for this help. If you need help, or something that have to do with France, just ask ! --Archimëa (talk) 23:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. sorry, last time. I forgot to ask about "Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption". Next Generation (53 (Lifecycle 1)). Imagine Media: 39–42. May 1999.. I found many issues but not the 53. I also search for it at imgur without succes.
I've noticed a back and forth on the reception page of Arkham Knight on whether or not it's technically "critical acclaimed". Since I can't edit it myself, (which would probably be undone by you anyway) I'm here to say that it should be considered as such. Your last edit claimed it was "constantly criticized for weak plot elements and the Batmobile"... looking at the games PS4 Metacritic page it has 9 perfect scores and over 50 of the 76 reviews are a 9 or above with only 5 mixed scores. I wouldn't call that "constant criticism". Even reviews that said the Batmobile was overused usually called the game fantastic such as IGN's review that said it was "outstanding on almost every level."
Oddworld Stranger's Wrath is another 88 metacritic score game http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox/oddworld-strangers-wrath/critic-reviews listed as "critically acclaimed" on wikipedia. Worth nothing once again, Strangers Wrath has 3 perfect scores, Arkham Knight has 9. I could go on forever but I don't want to bloat this argument any further.
Perhaps a compromise to make everyone happy (and prevent endless edit wars), the phrasing "near universal critical acclaim" could be used?
Metacritic and similar aggregating sites are not a be-all-end-all of reception and are becoming increasingly superfluous in a world where reviewers are abandoning scores, these sites just interpret the reviews in some cases and produce an aggregate score based on their own internal and secret formula. Sufficient sourcing would back up such a claim, alas no such sources exist in the article, and personal interpretations of scores (such as counting how many "perfect" scores a game has) is not an appropriate methodology. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!19:07, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Because it is already established how long before Arkham Asylum it occurs, it is unnecessary to add it for Arkham City too or you might as well add Arkham Knight as well. And "Heavily criticized" is not WP:NEUTRAL and unnecessary hyperbole. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!22:34, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mad Max: Fury Road, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salt flats. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
...is hilarious and kind of just made my day. I'm wiki stalking a particular problem editor of the "bropologist" variety and just saw you had changed your sig to this when I noticed that you are conversing with said editor on a film talk page. Instantly lightened my mood. THanks for that. Millahnna (talk) 20:08, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you keep deleting everything I type! You haven't covered the fact that there are knives and broken glass bottles in the game! Have you even played the game?! Why? It is not vandalism, I'm just covering a fact that you haven't! Give me a reason why you are doing this? Willdatbeast (talk) 11:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you had read the edit summary @Willdatbeast: that was left each time I undid your edit, you would have seen the word "unsourced". Your added information isn't sourced and you're adding it to a Featured Article. Instead of having a hysterical fit, try reading next time. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!13:34, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Jerry Robinson
I know Jerry said it because he said that to me, and I still have the recording. You're probably talking about the Bridwell quote, though. I think I have that at my office. But as for proving Jerry's involvement, I think one of Bill Finger's few interviews does a better job than that, and i know I have that one at my office. I'd add the sources myself, but I feel I have a COI issue because I knew Jerry. I'll be happy to provide what I know via talk pages and leave it up to others to decide. More soon. Doczilla@SUPERHEROLOGIST13:35, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've been meaning to write a journal article about the overlapping yet different accounts that Kane, Finger, and Robinson gave, because I see how the three accounts can fit together pretty well. For the most part, all three supported each other's versions. It was more a matter of which details each mentioned or emphasized. Bob acknowledged that Jerry drew the card sketch, but he downplayed its importance. Bob resented the thought of crediting a mere "assistant" with anything. I'll dig up that quote from Bill. The order of events matters, too, particularly whether the card sketch came before Bill showed Bob and Jerry the photos of Conrad Veidt. Doczilla@SUPERHEROLOGIST13:49, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Joker FA
I noticed that you are nominating Joker as an FA. I don't think I will weigh in because I don't feel like I am an expert on FA's. But I do support the idea of it being an FA and encourage you to try your best. Also if I may use an example..this article I believe may be the best example of an FA comic book character to set prose to. The Batman article is so outdated that it should be delisted. I do know that much. Jhenderson77723:22, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Alrighty. I'd definitely appreciate the help if you could provide it to deal with any comments/issues. I don't know exactly if right now is good for me to have a nomination going, but definitely soon. I know too we are getting more DLC coming, so that will have to be added, and the impending PC resolutions. So I think relatively soon I'll get it nominated, but glad you agree it ready too. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:52, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the last false report, i didn't remember weapon have a second attack... lmao.
But, i've got a good catch here. The is an error in the plot.
"The group infiltrate Haus de Hexe, the Tremere stronghold, and stop the Gangrel Erik from being turned into a Gargoyle, and he joins them." - NO.
The group infiltrate the "Ardan Tremere Chantry" (in Prague) [2]. Ardan reveals to Chritof that Anezka, seeking Christof's redemption, has visited the Tremere and Tzimisce clans, and then Haus de Hexe.
And then, they go to Vienna and infiltrate Haus de Hexe, where Etrius transform Erik in a gargoyle and reveals that the tzimisces stole the slaves and Anezka near Prague and that's at this moment they go back to Prague... [3] - replace "youmu" by "youtu". Website is blacklisted.
Suggest you go to your Special:Preferences and turn on the "prompt me if I'm entering a blank edit summary" thingy before hitting save for every edit.
And also, especially for GA reviews and FAC reviews, strongly recommend noting in every single edit summary: per GA Reviewer USERNAME, or per FAC comments by USERNAME, as this will help demonstrate your responsiveness to their recommendations.
Hey man, it's been too long since we last interacted. Glad I could have a new opportunity!
I've been working on the Alien (franchise) page over the last several months and have looked to streamline it for the continuities of Prometheus, Alien: Covenant, Alien, Aliens, Alien 3 and Alien: Resurrection. You know, I haven't really contributed to Prometheus, as I feel like it's been in such good shape that it doesn't necessitate my contributions, but when I checked out the page tonight, I saw that there was no mention of Alien Covenant and the rest of the prequel trilogy in the lead. I was curious, why isn't this included at the end of the lead? DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont06:15, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Make sure to click on both pictures to see them full size Darkwarriorblake as they will give you a chuckle. May your 2016 be full of joy and special times. MarnetteD|Talk03:32, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Happy Holidays!
Favre1fan93 (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:HH2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Seasons Greetings!
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2016!
Hello Darkwarriorblake, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2016.
Happy editing, TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:21, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Darkwarriorblake, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks both for your contributions to Wikipedia and also for being a valued friend and colleague. Very best wishes to you! --~~
I try to ask you, perhaps you're abble to help me. I'm writing the french page for Metroid (video game). My problem is i can't find english references with game analisys made at the release date (1986, 1987, 1988). I found some french and german articles, but no english journalist analisys. I tryed retromags but the search engine gave me only tips and tricks pages. otha, There are a lot of web page about virtual console release, GBA release, it's easy findable, but i'm looking for what was said in english/american press at the time (1986, 1987, 1988).
Perhaps a native english can find this easier than me ? or do you know someone involved in wikipedia metroid's pages that can help me ? --Archimëa (talk) 08:13, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have a look around for you. I'll also ask at the video game project because there are a lot of people there with a good knowledge of older magazines containing this kind of information. Can you just clarify for me what you mean by game analysis? Do you mean critic reviews, development, gameplay functionality? Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!18:49, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and thank you very much for your help. I'm really gratefull.
Yes. I meant by analysis : critic reviews about the overall game, game history, gameplay, development side if exist yes! etc (sorry fo my bad english, i thought analysis was clear, but critic reviews is so much).
I only found 3 pretty poor critics reviews from french magazines (tilt, micronews and génération4), 1 german reference that i haven't still translated (i must translate it in this days [5]). But I found a computer&Video Games page [6], with print problem i think in the last column)...
This critic reviews have been done, for the first game indeed, but in 2007, 2004, and 2007. Not in 1986, 1987, 1988.... and easy findable ;), done for GBA release and virtual console release
In between 1986 to 2004. Metroid became a huge hit. The way to look at the serie, in particular at the first game is differentnt now 20 or 30 years after. I think it's important to know what has been said about it at this time, what words have been choosen.
As far as i am in the developpement of my metroid page, i strongly think i must write 2 parts for reception section. One for the first release date and other one for re-release in 2004-2007...
Video games changed so much, video game press also. To give a quality for readers, it's impossible to mix critics in a same § to look at this game... --Archimëa (talk) 13:41, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Darkwarriorblake. You had time to look at this ?
I'm stopped in the developpment page! I only have now to write the reception section. (and also few small details...)
Perhaps this will help to understand : With the 1986, 1987 & 1988 magazines, i wrote this [15]. Sorry it's a Google automatic translation, but you might understand.
It's rather different than the reception section of English article. The english reception section of English articles should come after... Well in my opinion. But i know i'm closer from the reality than english version.
Hi. The FAC nominator is long gone on this one. I always notify someone or some wikiproject of upcoming TFAs for older FAs in case the article needs work, but I'm not sure who to contact about this one ... any ideas? - Dank (push to talk) 03:30, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks much. Taking another look ... the first four paragraphs below the lead are all unsourced, and there are sentence fragments ("electrical fields and is placed in quarantine.") Chris, could you take another look at this one? - Dank (push to talk) 18:16, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Prose may need some work, but the plot section doesn't have to be referenced with in-line citations (see MOS:PLOT). The only reason Panggilan Darah's plot was referenced when you reviewed it is because the film may be lost (not having been consulted, it cannot serve as a primary source). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:09, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There's this one, i dont know if that's from the same thing. I assumed it was comic art, even if its promotional, since it has a Marvel tag on it. So in that sense at least it is representative of how he appears in comics. If you can find a better image feel free, but that previous image has been long overdue for a replacement. It just seems insanely hard to find a good clean full body image of him from comic art. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!17:36, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I have looked on several occasions over the years and gave up when nothing turned up, so finding that one was a bit of luck really. At least it is in a comic style and probably done by a comic artist, it is representative of the chararacter in comic books. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!18:05, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Did Hulk smash all the other images that could be used?. Sorry but I couldn't resist this groaner of a joke. Cheers to you both for trying to get this to work. MarnetteD|Talk18:59, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for placing my edit in what I assume to be the proper place. Is the "production" section always the best place for this? I didn't see an option in the infobox. FilmGuy4444 (talk) 22:02, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There isn't an option in the infobox, I imagine because the budgets could change quite wildly. Production sections generally cover the behind-the-scenes elements of making the show so it is the best place I thought it could go, but there may be a better option, certainly if further budget information can be uncovered. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!17:11, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Joker
I'll be there in a couple of minutes. Yeah, you're absolutely correct — the Joker is a comics character the way Ahab is a character in a novel: Anything outside the original source is adapted media. -- Tenebrae (talk) 21:35, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I thought there was an active FA discussion there, but I couldn't find one. And yes, this already is a GA, and it has been improved upon since — even down to details like the cites all seeming to be archived and properly formatted. I don't see a reason for that particular objection. If it goes back to FA review, please let me know and I'll weigh in, for what it's worth. And as long as we're talking, I invite you to keep an eye on Superman. If you go to the most recent talk-page posts, you'll see there may be a situation that needs veteran editors to keep an impartial eye on.--Tenebrae (talk) 21:46, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Talk: Superman is worth looking over because it address similar objections to the one you've encountered. However, as I say there I'd like to keep that solution limited to the major characters, but this may highlight that there is a need for the kind of solution Triiiple Threat and I discuss there - that there is a page for the character as a transmedia entity and the material on the comics publication history is on a separate page. With Superman, Superman would become the top level article, and the comics material would go to Superman (comics). If you tried to do this with the Joker it could get a little... interesting. Joker (comics) would remain for the character in comics (the clue is in the disambiguation) and Joker (character) would be the top level article. Which would mean that you'd not really have to do anything with Joker (comics), all the work would need to be done on Joker (character). Which means that any objections to the FAC for Joker (comics) are invalid because, even if we changed how we dealt with the character, Joker (comics) wouldn't need much changing. Unless my logic is faulty, it should give you pretty much a good run on the FAC. If you nominate it I'll be happy to argue that line and fingers crossed it should go through. If you wanted to really nail this down, you could start Joker (character) now and that way all the material would be in the right place and you wouldn't have to rely on our ability to explain what should be done - you can just point people to what is currently being done. Emperor (talk) 15:06, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
See I just don't know how it would work. It's impossible to NOT mention the adaptations in the comic article because ultimately they are adaptations of the comic which is the source, this goes for films, animation and games. Several Joker episodes in BTAS were based directly on Joker comic stories for example. In my mind (and this is why I got so frustated at the fac) you have Joker (comics) -which can be renamed- which covers the original creation and goes off on tangents where applicable but remains largely focused on this original character. Assuming the character had never left the pages of comics, this would be the one and only, the original, the source. For film/animation/game there is Joker in other media, and Other versions of the Joker which covers alternative comic versions. Certainly you could have a Joker page that acts as disambiguation, but any article that follows the Joker comic character is going to reference the adaptations, and I don't see how the existing article can change in that regard, and I surely do not see how it would be better for it. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!20:46, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That is my point. I don't think Joker (comics) would need changing much because it is the article that deals with the appearance of the Joker in comics. If someone feels they need a higher level article on the Joker character then there is always Joker (character), so they can go nuts over there if they want to. I personally don't feel the need for it, but if that is what is stopping Joker (comics) from becoming an FA, then it is an option, but (as I say) that wouldn't really have much impact on the content of the page Joker (comics), it is more an argument for the creation of another page so the FAC should be able to progress without interference. Emperor (talk) 00:40, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Good stuff - I've given the FAC another read through and this refocusing seems the only solution to the objections raised, which are more... conceptual rather than focused on the content of the page (it is along the lines others propose to keep things moving forwards). I'll see what I can do in the next few days. I'm sure Tenebrae will also have a few good ideas. Once we've hacked out a structure and some content over there (the relevant articles on the films and TV that the Joker appears in should be easy enough to mine for good material), we can look at moving some parts of Joker (comics) over to it - IOM should stay (obviously) as should "literary analysis" but the rest of the cultural impact could move over as that specifically mentions his film appearances (the subsection could stay under the cultural impact header or be moved to their own sections). I suspect the characterisation will be an issue, but I think we can claim that is comics-focused. I'd like to focus on the differing characterisation in his TV and film appearances in relevant sections on Joker (character) as there is no easy way to fit one section to all those different takes on the Batman world. Once it has starter taking shape we can ask for further input from those in the comics project and in other places like Talk:The Joker (The Dark Knight).
Oh and another example of a former comics article acting as the top level article for a media franchise (that came up in the Superman discussion) is: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. It breaks down quite nicely into chunks that go into their separate sections pointing on to sub-pages. Emperor (talk) 00:50, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
thanks emperor. It's just frustrating because I wanted it to be a one-stop peak article, encompassing everything in detail and a real example of a fa, hurts to carve it up even a little after so many years of research and effort.Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!11:22, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it isn't easy but I suppose you have to "kill your darlings". The problem is that I suppose Joker (comics) can't ever be the one-stop upper article, because of its comics focus. It all links on to the relevant articles but it might take a couple more clicks. Joker (character) would tend to have the key links up-front and more easily accessible. I think this gets to the core of those conceptual concerns in the FAC - what are we trying to do with the Joker (comics) page? It may be we are trying to do too much with the one page and focusing on it in comics and putting some of the material there onto Joker (character) is the way to go. After all, as noted in the FAC, the page is already large, so refocusing it might give more room too. I wouldn't have recommended it without the FAC, but we've got to roll with the punches and try and do the best job - I think this approach is certainly better than the suggestions on the FAC - move Joker (comics) to Joker (character) and then hack it into bits and share them out to sub-pages. This way leaves the bulk of Joker (comics) intact (as most of it is about the comics) and we start the main article afresh.
Anyway, I've started the talk page over at Talk:Joker (character) and added some thoughts there. Hopefully, we can get more people involved to flesh it out (although really most of the material is on the relevant pages linked to, we just need to sift them for the useful sources and information). Emperor (talk) 21:05, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting dig regarding Batman #1's monthly release date. What concerns me though is that it's the only source saying that that I can find and I can't tell where MTV got that release date from. I am really curious (if the release date is true) if the Joker came after Luthor's debut like I originally thought or maybe the Joker could possibly be before him. I just can't find a daily release date for Luthor. Jhenderson77715:24, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. All sources that I saw said Spring 1940. So I am surprised a source like MTV figured out both the month and date of that particular comic book. I guess maybe they found out on that copyright source they picked up Batman's first appearance on but they didn't make that clear. Jhenderson77717:51, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That is confusing. The cover clearly states July. Also the index talked about Superman #4 maybe being the first released comic book with Luthor. It's even before it on the DC database. Another comic book that isn't clear when it's release date is. They even say a different release date for Batman #1 too. Jhenderson77718:00, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The cover says April doesn't it? I know that even now comics will be sold in the month or two prior to the cover date for whatever bizarre reason. That link i posted before says that Superman 4 came earlier but it was the second Luthor story, because in the first one Superman doesn't know who Luthor is. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!18:06, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Chronologically Lex first appeared in Action Comics. Which means he is probably first published in it. But I am wondering if we should note what his first released comic book as first appearance in the inbox etc. Same with Sandman (Wesley Dodds). It seems like Lex maybe did predate Joker though. I should maybe note this article says they are the same year. Jhenderson77718:25, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Even when we have conflicting perspectives and can get hot under the collar, we can still reach a amicable resolution that sees us collaborating and being friendly by the end of the day. After years of editing the same articles, with the sole intent being the improved quality of the project, I promise not to let you down with your good faith. DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont04:20, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've been hard at work to make sure the article's on track. There's still loads to do, but I believe these first few sections are setting a good standard for the entire thing to follow. Hopefully, by the time I'm done with it, it'll be FL-worthy. DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont09:43, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It took a hell of a lot of work, but the Aliens section is now up to par, as well! Goddamn, I am not looking forward to the next two sections. Prometheus should be relatively easy to handle, but those next two movies have such weak characters and I'm not exactly a fan of them, so... the sludgy part begins tomorrow! DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont01:50, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You've done a great job DarthBotto, the effort is undeniable. I'd help but my time is already limited, and at the moment I can only throw myself into something I'm feeling passionate about which after the amount of time I put into Prometheus only for it to kind of suck, is not the Aliens franchise :P Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!20:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I can take care of the rest of that list page- no problem! But yeah, I'm a fan of the general franchise, but I only really am passionate about the first two movies and Prometheus. I actually like Prometheus as a stand-alone movie and not a part of the franchise, like what Ridley Scott's only recently decided it is, but oh well! I guess this is the challenging part! DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont01:42, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I may eat my own words when I get to Alien: Resurrection, but... shit, Shit, SHIT, I don't think I'll ever come across a character more difficult to scrounge up reliable sources for than Robert Morse! Grr, it's driving me insane! Why couldn't Alien 3 have been better and more popular? :P DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont11:51, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Scream (1996 film)
Please be more mindful in reverting edits. In your original reversion, you re-introduced outdated information that had been updated based upon the linked ref. It's fine to remove "certified fresh", but please be more careful not to re-introduce information that has since been changed in the link target. AldezD (talk) 19:48, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Translation
Hello from France. I'm looking for some help with a translation. (I always come here when i've got a small problem, if I disturb you, you can say me...) Can you help me for a translation ? Here at the bottom of the page, last question, does Alcorn say "look at the Magnavox Odyssey game video... [...] "it is a boring game" or "it is a difficult game".
The reason is we hesitate to translate "It was a dog of a game!" to "difficult game" or "bad game"
Ok so I researched what Brown Box and Magnavox and reflection referred to so it makes a bit more sense to me, but I'm afraid there is no additional clarity I can provide for you, your interpretation of the statement is fairly accurate. He's saying that the game is impossible to play, I looked up the Youtube video he mentions and the ball seems to rebound and fly off at unexpected angles and phase through the paddles, so I assume that is what he is referring to. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!21:52, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. reading your first answer, I conclued that i can't say more than "impossible to play" and certainly not "difficult" or "boring"... That's sayd, we found other websites talking about this interview and they, in my own opinion, wrongly simplyfied what he said to "a boring magnavox game"...
As you may have seen, WB finally confirmed the worst kept secret that Asylum and City were being remastered. I've added all the relevant info on the games to Batman: Arkham, as well as small blurbs at the Asylum and City pages respectively. Just wanted to see if you help keep an eye on Batman: Return to Arkham and Batman: Return To Arkham. I've just redirected the article, because I don't think it will warrant its own article. The remaster is the same game with all DLC and polish. Nothing new there. Let me know if you have any thoughts on the matter. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:19, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
yeah I will add them to my watvhlist when I get on a computer. I agree that it won't need it's own article potentially, it's like the win version of city. Only issue potentially will be reception sections.Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!12:18, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So, I hit another roadblock with List of Alien characters. I have good references and content for all the characters leading up to Sabra Hillard... who I cannot find anything for. In a JoBlo review, the reviewer says that she has a nice ass and in a literary analysis, someone says that she has a tender sex scene. That's all fine, except... the tender sex scene is already mentioned in the section for Frank Elgyn, meaning that there is literally nothing appropriate or unique to say about Hillard. What do you say? Should I delete that character from the page, since she is inconsequential? I did that for one of the characters in Alien 3. DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont21:54, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's hard to exclude her given other characters that are present, you'd probably be okay mentioning this sex scene between her and the other character and using the film as a reference for her basic actions. It's only a small blip. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!20:44, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
With that being the case, I should probably bring the content for Morse back, as well. It's a little frustrating having to deal with characters that have such little impact on the story and such little cultural bearing. I guess I can't have two paragraphs for them all! DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont22:13, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comic Book Character Infobox addition help request
I want to start adding a relatives part to each comic book characters relatives on there info box starting with the X-Men since they will be the easiest. I will experiment with the best look but, I want it to be just like how famous peoples relatives are listed so why not for fictional characters as well. I will also experiment with names and codenamed and maybe a slash so both can be shown more like discuss what would look best. I was wondering if you could please help me to get this onto the template that would be awesome. I feel that this would make a great addition to the info box for comic book characters.
I'm sorry if I pissed you off, but other sources have the movie's runtime at 130 minutes. I see that source you used has 123 minutes, but it's incorrect. Can you please use another source for the runtime? Gmv18 (talk) 02:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still around MisterShiney, I just don't really build up articles as often anymore. Got tired of having to argue with people over minor things all the time, and nothing I've really been passionate about either. Like I built up the Vampire the Masquerade articles but that was because someone asked me to and then I can't help finishing it. I'm still here though and if you ever need help can always ask. Will do my best. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!23:02, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please point me to the discussion you mentioned here? This is just absurd. As with every comic book character page, the Joker (comics) article is the primary page for the character in general as he is primarily a comic book character, so it's ridiculous that we it couldn't pass FA without a useless duplicate article. DarkKnight214921:52, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Joker_(comics)/archive1. It couldn't pass because it was argued that by being about the comic character it couldn't mention pretty much anything else, I pointed out the Joker in other Media article, this wasn't sufficient and this was the suggestion which Emperor helped me solve with the Character article in this discussion, which serves as a hub of the "character" while the Joker (comics) article can only be about the comic version of the character. I made the same argument you did and it was shut down, so this is what I have to do to get it elevated to FA when I can muster the willpower to go through that process again. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!22:00, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A friend of mine not much older than me is going in for open-heart surgery in a few days. This and other concerns make me want to update you and a couple of other good Wikipedia editor-friends about where to find my ongoing project to protect Toonopedia, which can't be automatically archived at Archive.org. There is a danger that this unique source of comics / cartoon information may go dark permanently: Don Markstein died a few years ago, and while Toonopedia has mostly been up during that time, there have been outages lasting from a day or two to weeks.
In case no one sees me editing for a couple, three months, it might mean something's happened to me. If that's the case, I'd like you to know why where Webcitation archive links are: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tenebrae/Toonopedia_backup.
My organization of them is a bit haphazard — I inadvertently started two alphabetical lists, and your and other editors' archiving of C and D are listed separately. But it's mostly understandable: The list at User:Tenebrae/Toonopedia backup#Entries added to articles shows my progress thus far in incorporating archived links into Wikipedia. It's only the archived links above that section that still need to be placed.
No action is being asked for. I just wanted to feel reassured that if anything premature ever happens to me that the archived links not yet placed in Wikipedia articles — and the Toonopedia information, which in some cases doesn't appear in many or even any other source — don't become lost to history. With great regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 18:58, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hulk (comics), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Skaar. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Can you look at Batman: Arkham? A redlink editor is insisting on changing Origins' time frame from 8 years to 5 (our favorite unconfirmed editor edit) and I'm at my revert limit (after telling them to start a discussion). Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:02, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh man. I'm sorry. It seems you are correct. We've had this issue come up with editors changing the number, I forgot what was the correct one (and failed to look at the Origins article to see). Wrongly assumed what was at the Batman: Arkham article was already correct. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:02, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DWB, here's another one of your FAC nominations at TFA. I know you keep an eye on your articles so I haven't looked at this one closely; please check for dead links and for any recent questionable edits before it hits the Main Page. - Dank (push to talk) 03:34, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Darkwarriorblake. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Season's Greetings, Darkwarriorblake! At this wonderful time of year, I would like to give season’s greetings to all the fellow Wikipedians I have interacted with in the past! May you have a wonderful holiday season! MarnetteD|Talk16:38, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Darkwarriorblake, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2017.
Happy editing, TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:25, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Darkwarriorblake, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2017.
Happy editing, Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:37, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me, sir. I don't mean to intrude, but I would like to know why you keep deleting the Returning Transformers page of the "Transformers: Dark of the Moon" article that I keep trying to add. Spider-Man2017 (talk) 17:58, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I need to explain my recent edit on South Park: The Stick of Truth. Usually I use Checklinks to find any dead links on Wikipedia. I used Checklinks on the Stick of Truth page, and it turned out that none of the links were dead. I saved the edit anyway, and I forgot to say that used Checklinks to "clean up" the page a little bit. I was about to undo the damage i've done, but you did it for me. I appreciate you undoing my mistake.
I've learned from my mistakes, and from now on i'll only use Checklinks on pages that have dead links hiding in them. I've helped some users such as Lordtobi and LocalNet find and replace dead links this way. DBZFan30 (talk) 03:17, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking for myself, I appreciated the edit on the Google page, but I also recognize that the Checklinks software needs further work. A few of the sources marked as dead were actually alive, one was behind a subscription paywall, and the software removed some wikilinks. If a page isn't being actively monitored by editors who have the time and opportunity to check, the software could potentially incorrectly mark sources that go unnoticed. However, I also understand that not all software is perfect and can still do great work even without a 100% perfection rate. I just hope that for the pages the software is used, a human makes sure it was all marked correctly, but I realize even that isn't optimal either. LocalNet (talk) 08:41, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
...at Fury Road, I had only meant to remove the uncited POV "making it the first action film in cinema history to receive those nominations" and must have removed the stuff in the lead by accident. Oops! Thanks! --Tenebrae (talk) 20:17, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm considering whatever or not I'm gonna go into semi-retirement from editing this site because of a major protest and disagreement regarding image on TV shows and such. I'll edit whenever things that interest me come up. That's it. Do you think I should do that? BattleshipMan (talk) 07:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's your choice Battleship, if you're not feeling it anymore it might be worth at least taking a small vacation and see if when you come back you feel any better about it/ You can still edit stuff semi-retired but I don't really bother building up articles anymore because I don't have the energy to fight with people all the time over minor things. Like someone has changed the plot on Die Hard, their edit summary said the changes introduced stuff but it didn't introduce one of the things brought up and the other was pointless that didn't need mentioning. It was better before, doesn't even mention Karl by name yet it's longer. But I know if I revert it the user will kick off, and I can't be bothered with it, so you have to be able to accept that some stuff you can't change and just do the edits that matter to you. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!21:42, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Joker
I noticed that the third paragraph of the lead has two sentences that start with "although". Maybe the last sentence of the third paragraph could use "while" instead of "although". I don't think it's a big deal but I'm running it by you in case you feel a tweak is warranted. DrRC (talk) 22:37, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly one year ago, you nominated List of Alien characters for deletion, which honestly was one of the best things that ever happened to that page. I was pushed to set out to improve it, unlike how anyone had been pushed on that page before. Now, I am proud to inform you that the faith you showed in your withdrawl has paid off, as is has now been promoted to Featured List status. Thank you. :) DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont23:21, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to say thank you for that useful article you shared with me! I wanted to invite you to give your input for a discussion I opened up on the List of Alien characters talk page. Do you believe waiting a bit before discussing the cultural impact and different analyses is prudent? DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont21:38, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You're creating a small section for characterization which is unnecessary, then creating a separate section for personalities which is putting it squarely in-universe rather than as part of the characterization section which, if sourced and written properly allows for out of universe descriptions, then creating another top level section for other versions of the Hulk which is not the same layout as a lot of other major character articles like Batman, Superman, the Joker, etc, putting the minor "Other characters named Hulk" that noone has ever heard about or cares about above two sections about the title character, and overall creating a tonne of unnecessary top level segments featuring a small amount of content. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!21:03, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Dredd has been scheduled for the above date as Today's Featured Article. I'd appreciate it if you could check the article one more time to make sure it's up-to-date. You're welcome but not obligated to edit the text that will appear on the Main Page; I'll be trimming it to around 1100 characters. Thanks! - Dank (push to talk) 21:36, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good to see it today, "Dredd, a violent action film with a criminally underperforming box office but critical achievement. The only force for order are the Admins, who act as judge, jury and reverter. Crime is punished harshly. The sentence for not leaving an edit summary: 30 cryo cycles. The sentence for replacing content with "Josh is awezum!": 400 cryo cycles. The sentence for not passing this article: Death. Or banning."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:31, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Jamesjpk (talk) 23:54, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please explain?
I'm not trying to be argumentative. Could you please explain this? As you've clearly misunderstood my point—you're talking about translated titles (for which you have a good point) and I'm talking about ones that are untranslated (such as names). Curly "JFC" Turkey🍁¡gobble!09:51, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be honest, character articles are not my strength or something I've worked on really apart from the Joker about which I'm pretty passionate. I can help if you give me specific requests, but I'd struggle to develop the article much. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!21:20, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I hear you, as this is the first character article I've ever created, if I'm not mistaken. I figured I'd extend the offer, as it's a leading character from a film article you've spearheaded. The good thing is that I'm getting closer to having it ready to be in the main space, I believe. DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont21:23, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, interesting concept. I'm mostly done with the article, but you brought up an intriguing potential section. Would you perhaps be interested in composing that section? I'll understand if you have enough on your plate, mind you. DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Until then, good work on the franchise page. It still looks dreadful, but wiping away those swaths of advertisement cruft was a good start. I've adjusted the quality ratings across the board to C, as no sensible editor could register that page as being B class anymore. I dunno; maybe getting that page to GA status would be a lofty goal for someone. DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont23:42, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am Jack's complete lack of giving a fuck. He had it coming the second he abandoned any attempt at collaboration and ignored an ongoing discussion. My only regret is moderating what was said at all. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!22:27, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You have to start caring about this. Everyone loses their cool occasionally, and we generally don't block people for incivility in the heat of the moment. However, there's a difference between momentarily losing your cool and a history of making gratuitous personal attacks. The second is blockable, and you're rapidly approaching the limits of WP:NPA. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:29, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If the site wants to ban me and lose my contributions, they can have at it. It'll be Wikipedia's loss, there aren't exactly a tonne of editors who put the effort in to making most articles anything other than passable, and even fewer who will take stuff beyond GA. People can think what they want but I do great work and I help people when they genuinely want help, any negatives are far outweighed by the ridiculous amount of positives over years. Sick to death of people edit warring to get their way and then projects endorsing that behaviour when the work was done following the guidelines the projects set out. Every single time they do it, it's a personal attack on the time I've wasted trying to help here, and that is far more offensive. It's exactly why that semi-retired sign is up there. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!21:40, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Prometheus (2012 film) - Viral campaign
Could you explain your reasoning of removing the name of the video "Introducing the David 8 – The Next Generation Weyland Robot"? I don't mean where or how its written, but the fact that you've removed the only reference to its name.--Gonnym (talk) 12:51, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Because it isn't important? The Ted 2023 name wasn't important either but I kept it as a compromise edit, the setting and era are described in the next, so the titles add nothing to the content. The title "Introducing the David 8 – The Next Generation Weyland Robot" adds absolutely no useful information to "After calling the number, the caller was sent a text message from Weyland Corporation that linked them to a video that was presented as an advertisement for the "David 8" android, narrated by Fassbender. An extended version of the video, released on April 17, 2012, lists the android's features, including its ability to seamlessly replicate human emotions without the restrictions of ethics or distress." And the title is not in either of the sources present. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!12:57, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Considering the numerous conflicts Nurseline has had over adding excessive detail to other franchise pages, I'd say it's pretty evident why the quality of the page took a nosedive. There's no way in hell I'm going to let the same thing happen to List of Alien characters, after I've saved it from deletion and brought it up to Featured List status. DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont03:37, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@DarthBotto:, ok so the first thing I'd say is that the opening paragraph has some synthesis. I don't want to edit it because maybe you know something I don't but David can't have created the Xenomorphs, there are statues built to them in prometheus so they predate David. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!22:45, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I applied your suggestion, as well as the GAN reviewer. Though, yours about "universal critical acclaim" was the only one that made me chuckle. But, yeah, even though people interpret David as the creator, I think it's better to just say he engineers Aliens, as Prometheus does in fact clarify that there were Xenomorphs beforehand. I'm going to continue to tackle the GAN points, though you're welcome to jump in and have a crack at a new (sub?)section about godhood, or whichever point you were contemplating. DARTHBOTTOtalk•cont08:53, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@DarthBotto:, I've read the article again and I'm not sure there's anything I can add. The analytical stuff you've put in there under creation is really good, but if I add a theme section it seems like it's going to duplicate a lot of the stuff you've already added. Actually, reading it, your creation section reads a lot more like an analysis section, it goes in depth about a lot of reasoning behind what he does rather than creation. Is there any information on the hair design and why it was chosen? Reasons why the character was designed the way he is? Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!22:22, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cast section and character descriptions of Die Hard 2
What do you mean? First you explain your edits then I will explain my points. One more thing, don't you check your grammar mistakes before posting? Pure conSouls (talk) 17:32, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Moaning about grammar is pathetic Consouls. No I didn't bother to correct it because I didn't care, I wanted to send you a message quickly so I did it quickly. I don't need to explain my edits to you because I've already explained them to you in the past, I explained the year on the Assassins Creed articles that you kept edit warring on, and I explained 3 times yesterday on each Batman article that the articles are not written just for people who know about the video game medium, they are written for everyone. EDIT: Although let's take your own logic here to pick your argument apart. You said " And what is the purpose of adding its year in the lead? Can't people see in its "info table"?". You can also see the title, series, platform, directors, publishers, and developers in the infobox. So should these all be removed from the lead as well? Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!17:38, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My "ConSouls" is a portmanteau of Console and Souls. See video game articles such as Fallout 3 and 4, Call of Duty 4 MW to WWII, Battlefield 3 to 1, Titanfall, Horizon ZD, infamous series and many more, they doesn't use that format! So you mean the editors who made and maintained these articles are wrong? We should use its year in the article only when there is a game of the same name released in other year. And I really don't want to fight with you or anyone, I'm here to help not to war with others but try to understand my point. Pure conSouls (talk) 17:54, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My "ConSouls" is a portmanteau of Console and Souls. See video game articles such as Fallout 3 and 4, Mass Effect series, Call of Duty 4 MW to WWII, Battlefield 3 to 1, Titanfall, Horizon ZD, infamous series and many more, they doesn't use that format! So you mean the editors who made and maintained these articles are wrong? We should use its year in the article only when there is a game of the same name released in other year. And I really don't want to fight with you or anyone, I'm here to help not to war with others but try to understand my point. Pure conSouls (talk) 17:54, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
First of all mind your language! I can also use this type of language, it's not difficult for me and by mentioning your so called "featured articles" by yourself is showing off! I don't mind whether you go to wikiprojects or administrators, I didn't violate the three-revert rules and the response I'm seeing from the wikiproject I'm sure that my explanation and point will be approved. Pure conSouls (talk) 19:44, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, you've been a disruptive editor in the Batman Arkham game articles. Darkwarriorblake was only doing what it was featured article material and you are being unreasonable about it. BattleshipMan (talk) 20:20, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Don't you understand that your language can hurt others? "I'm not dying, my health is perfect! Your NOT dying as well, are you? I think yes. See you are bullying me!
Do you remember few months ago someone as well as I was adding "open world" in the lead but when you explained your point to me I didn't revert your edit, at that time your language was aggressive to me but your point was right and after that I removed "open world" from the lead in most of the articles and explained other editors "POLITELY". Can't you understand the word "POLITE"? Pure conSouls (talk) 15:16, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not supporting him in any way, but as you've warned PureConSouls about 3RR, I feel the need to remind you that it applies to your reverts as well. Please take this as just a friendly reminder, hence no templating. -- ferret (talk) 18:23, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean you want to add something? Because everything there should be sourced. Like for GA standard you can probably get away with it depending on the reviewer but if oyu ever intend to make it a featured article you'll need sourcing. I try to source the plot where possible to, you can use direct quotes from games like at Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines. I think for the Witcher, you should source anything you can since a lot of those things like the setting aren't directly available in the game. What did you want to add? Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!19:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Don't feel obligated, but could I ask for an ensemble cast photo of the Ronin article, like what you did here? I know nothing about this sort of thing but I'd appreciate if you make one for that article, which I'm currently improving. In case you're interested, the top-billed cast are in the poster. Regards, SLIGHTLYmad 15:28, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
@Slightlymad:, sure, who do you want in it? Bear in mind it needs to be an even number. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!16:17, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
_(14586469407).jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
![[7]](http://download.abandonware.org/magazines/Tilt/tilt_numero050/TILT%20-%20n050%20-%20janvier%201988%20-%20page064%20%20et065%20.jpg){kind=link}
![[8]](http://download.abandonware.org/magazines/Generation%204/generation4_numero006/Gen4%20%236%20-%20page%20054.jpg){kind=link}
![[9]](http://download.abandonware.org/magazines/Micro%20News/micronews_numero013/micro%20news%20-%20n%B0%2013%20-%20septembre%201988%20-%20page%20104%20et%20page%20105.jpg){kind=link}
_-_Ensemble_Photo.png){kind=link}
