User talk:Rtkat3/Archive 13

Spider-Man II and Spider-Gwen

If they begin a relationship, as is alluded to in the promotional material, then a brief mention of it may be reasonable, IMO. Otherwise, I'd leave it out. Nightscream (talk) 19:53, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Injustice Comics Moved

Why did you move the Injustice Comics to "In Other Media"? As far as I'm aware, it belongs in "Other Versions" since it qualifies as an alternate timeline displayed in comics. If we are going by the logic that it is tied to other media (the Injustice video game) why don't the Arkham Knight comics deserve to be moved as well? Thanks,Klayman55 (talk) 02:08, 13 January 2017 (UTC)Klayman55[reply]

The Arkham Universe does not have a designated Earth either, as far as I am aware. Correct me if I am wrong. In your explanation, I still do not see how that would be an different from Injustice. Thanks, Klayman55 (talk) 03:13, 21 February 2017 (UTC)Klayman55[reply]

Monsters Unleashed

I've combined the two volumes into a single article, as WikiProject Comics does for multiple volumes of small-run series. It probably should have been discussed on the talk page before you created that other article. But I understand: WP:BRD. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:21, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Rtkat3. Always liked your Wikipedia handle, by the way. The difference is that Secret Wars has three iterations with long articles — although each of the second two series' articles needs to be trimmed severely; one of them has an issue-by-issue synopsis, which WPC specifically disallows. The better example would be Mystic Comics. But no worries. All good. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:33, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Eldrac

The article Eldrac has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non notable character with only primary sources

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Killer Moff (talk) 16:17, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Flint (Marvel Comics)

The article Flint (Marvel Comics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non notable character with only primary sources

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Killer Moff (talk) 16:18, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Haechi

The article Haechi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non notable character with only primary sources

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Killer Moff (talk) 16:19, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Iso (comics)

The article Iso (comics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non notable character with only primary sources

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Killer Moff (talk) 16:21, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ulysses (comics)

The article Ulysses (comics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

three non notable characters with only primary sources

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Killer Moff (talk) 16:23, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

Hello and good day sir, could you please cease and desist from adding to knowledge that which is impossible to verify, that which has little coverage, and that which has original research backing them.

Wikipedia indicates in policy, WP:GNG that articles possessing some of the aforementioned qualities may not be suitable for inclusion. The few significant coverage possessed by some of the comic characters you developed are by their inventors, hence faulting in WP:GNG as sources provided are to be independent of subject. Celestina007 (talk) 20:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Ben Reilly
added a link pointing to Broadway
Dead No More: The Clone Conspiracy
added a link pointing to Broadway

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bucky redirects

Hi, I wanted to tell you that I don't think it's great that you removed the Winter Soldier (comics) redirect to Bucky Barnes since it wasn't broken and it would be convenient to have incase of a split in the future. I hope you don't take offense but I think it's better if such links were left be. I intentionaly left them like that when I split the Bucky artilce and Bucky Barnes one.★Trekker (talk) 14:35, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

'Incomplete' tag

Hi Rtkat3. You placed the template {{incomplete}} on Beauty and the Beast (2017 film). Would you care to provide some detail on the article's talk page about what you feel is missing? Thanks! Wyddgrug (talk) 00:54, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rtkat3 responded on my talk page.
I haven't seen the film so cannot vouch for the description of the plot as it appears being accurate, but it looks like a thorough treatment that takes the reader right through the story. (In fact it looks longer than most plot sections and I see someone has tagged it for this and there is some discussion on the talk page.) I see you've edited the article since and what I don't understand is why the incomplete tag has been left there. Do you still feel that the plot section is incomplete? If so, please say something on the talk page so other editors know what needs addressing. Pending that I've removed the tag, as I can't see that the article is missing anything substantial. Wyddgrug (talk) 22:31, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Reavers (comics), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marvel Heroes. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Amazons (DC Comics), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Silver Swan. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mystery Diners

My apology, the IP previous to your edit on Mystery Diners (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) had vandalized the page. As the edits were overlapping, I was unable to undo just the IP's. So I undid your edits as well. My apology. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 23:25, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bakuto

See Bakuto (character). 73.168.15.161 (talk) 03:25, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mummy (undead), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Under Wraps. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Aphrodite (DC Comics)
added a link pointing to Themyscira
Hermes (DC Comics)
added a link pointing to Themyscira
Madame Hydra
added a link pointing to Heroes Reborn

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kraken (character), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Doctor Faustus. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Phosphorus Rex, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greg Ellis. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Detail bloat and other notes on writing

Hi. Would you please stop adding these ridiculously inflated passages of useless detail like this one and [this one? These sections are supposed to briefly summarize material. The edited version of the entry on William Cobb here is of reasonable length and detail. The prior version is not, and is not helping this project. I've gone over this with you on more than one occasion over the past several years. Can you pleas stop? Nightscream (talk) 22:14, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

One other thing:
There are certain practices that I come across every day in comics-related articles that cost me a lot of time to clean up. Since I see that you created this article, which exhibits some of them, I would really appreciate it if you incorporated this into your writing/editing habits, given the amount of work you do:
  • Storylines are not italicized. They're quoted. Only the names of specific books are italicized.
  • Bullets are clarify, at a glance, the items in a list. If you only have one item under a heading, then it's not a list. They are also not needed if the item is a paragraph of considerable length.
  • Similarly, you cannot divide a section into only one subsection. If a character like Grid, for example, only appears in one other media adaptation, then this is the way to present it.
  • I understand if you don't remember the creative team or date of a given issue, but if you know that a book cited as a source is by Marvel or DC, then please try to include that in the citations, since it's easy to do so. It would save me a lot of work.
  • I'm not sure if you do this or if it's other editors who do this, but please don't refer to storylines or other things as "events". We have to write these articles with the understanding that the uninitiated may read them. We can't assume that everyone who reads them understands comics lingo like you and I do. The clearest way to refer to a story, storyline, story arc, etc., is as such. Calling it an "event", may confuse the reader, who may not understand if the word "event" refers to an external, out-universe event, like a company ending an imprint, or an internal, in-universe event, like what happens to a character. Similarly, brandings and initiatives like The New 52 and All-New, All-Different Marvel should not be italicized or quoted, nor referred to as "events".
I would really appreciate it if you took the time to consider this, as it would improve the consistency of the comics articles on Wikipedia. Thanks again, Rtkat3. Nightscream (talk) 00:05, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your response.
I apologize if it seemed that I was implying that you were the one doing this. I've long-assumed that multiple editors were doing it. (This is why I commented above "I'm not sure if you do this or if it's other editors who do this...") I contacted you yesterday merely because I noticed that one particular example of this was by you. In general, I appreciate the energy and the work you display in trying to improve articles.
I don't think changes in costume are salient enough to be significant, unless you can cite a secondary source indicating otherwise. If we noted every time a character's look changes amid a new artist being assigned to them, the articles would further cluttered with fannish cruft. Nightscream (talk) 16:17, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Why are you still creating superfluous subheadings in articles (here, for example), when I mentioned to you above that this is unnecessary and redundant? Can you please stop? Nightscream (talk) 03:18, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you still adding bullets to single-paragraph/single-sentence sections? Nightscream (talk) 18:03, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Creator credits in Lead sections

Hi. Please do not remove creator credits from Lead sections, as you did here and here. Such information is indeed salient enough that it should be mentioned in the Lead. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 00:45, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Lead section of an article is a summary of the article's most salient information, which means it duplicates information found further down in the article, so one is not a substitute for the other. For articles on comics characters, the characters' creators and first appearance is obviously among the most important info. If you came across other articles like that, then they were wrong.
In any event, while it's true that editors on the Comics Project have stressed that articles should emphasize out-universe information instead of in-universe information, and that this means emphasizing Publication history sections that discuss the characters in terms of their real-world status over FCB sections that treat the fictional stories as real, if all you're going to do is create a PH heading and move info from the Lead to that new section, then you're not improving the article, for the reason mentioned above.
Regarding the upcoming Miles Morales plot point:
The ideal examples for handling plot info in comics character articles are the Batman, Superman and Spider-Man articles, which have enjoyed Featured Article or Good artcle status. You'll notice that the FCB section in Spidey's article is small compared to the PH section (especially compared to the out-of-control FCB sections in articles like Captain America). Ditto for the Batman article, in which the PH section combines out-universe and in-universe information, with in-universe information on the character summarized historically in the Characterization section. The Superman article has a FCB section, but again, look at how it generally summarizes the most important historical info about his stories. It does not list every single storyline. Simply put, that is not what a general knowledge encyclopedia does. That is more along the lines of what an index does. It is for this reason that I've tried to keep the FCB modest in the Miles Morales article. In truth, I've thought for some time that I could trim it even more. A mere fight or confrontation between two characters, in and of itself, does not necessarily need to be mentioned.
Just remember that both the Lead section and the Infobox summarize information in the article (albeit in different ways), and that this means they will repeat info in the article's body, and therefore, should not be thought of as substitutes for mentioning things in the body, or vice versa. Nightscream (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Simon Stagg for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Simon Stagg is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Stagg until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Drmies (talk) 16:22, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rtkat3: I occasionally read Drmies' talk page to see whether I can help with something. The deletion discussion exists; just click on the link. It's a peculiar glitch in the software that they are redlinked in the notification messages even though they have already been created. I haven't looked at the article, but I'll wish you good luck arguing for its retention, nonetheless. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:43, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

John Rocco Edit-A-Thon

Annnouncing RRTF's first Edit-A-Thon! In honor of his July 9 birthday, RRTF will be hosting an editing event focused on author/illustrator John Rocco. The event will last until the first day of August, when the most helpful contributor will be featured on RRTF's forums. More information can be found here on the talk page, where you may also post questions and comments (as always). Please consider helping out! -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 03:41, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Favor for Rtkat3

Hello Rtkat3, can you do me a huge favor and write a synopsis for "Ties That Bind" (#109B) on List of The Loud House episodes? That segment badly needs one! Oh, and make sure to write one in your own words for copyright reasons. Thanks!Elijah Abrams (talk) 22:53, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re: List of The Loud House episodes

Hi, there. Just wanted to follow up. There was no reason to remove that information from the lead and then replace it with "below is a list of episodes." That is obvious from the article title that it is a list of episodes, so having that there is redundant. Also, for the segment "L Is for Love," please stop changing "Is" to "is," as per MOS:CAPS, only prepositions should not be capitalized—unless they're at the beginning or end of a title—and "is" is not a preposition. And please stop adding the quotation marks to the L for that same segment as even the segment title card does not have those. You've been unofficially warned at least two times about this. I'm not one to template good faith editors like yourself, just be more careful in the future and heed the advice given. Thanks. Now, having said that, as you seem to enjoy writing episode summaries, we could certainly use your help with that. That would certainly be appreciated. Amaury (talk | contribs) 23:46, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another Favor

Hey Rtkat3, can you do me another favor and write the summaries for "Bathroom Break!!" and "Slice of Life"? They still need one each.Elijah Abrams (talk) 23:26, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Editor of the Week

Editor of the Week
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your dedication to detail. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:2ReinreB2 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I nominate Editor Rtkat3 for being unflappable, scrupulous, and dedicated. This user has made so many substantial and incredibly useful edits, the kind that take a lot of care and attention. In particular, he shows a skill at maintaining very large lists - the kind of pages that often scare off would-be editors. [1], [2] The content he creates always fills the right niche, and is well-written and -referenced. [3], [4], [5] The attribute that really shines through in Rtkat3, however, is his dedication to detail. He can often be found performing small fixes that make a big differences in a page's readability, including fixing DAB links and template errors. [6], [7], [8] Finally, the way he takes the time to clean up after himself if one of his edits breaks formatting or returns an error if much appreciated as well. [9], [10], [11] I frequently find myself visiting a page to fix some problem noted earlier, only to find it already taken care of!

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week: 

{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}

Thanks again for your efforts! Lepricavark (talk) 22:06, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RRTF Roll-call: December 2024

♦ Hello, {{subst:BASEPAGENAME}}! This message represents your invite to the annual Rick Riordan task force roll-call. It has been a year since our last check-in, and all members are being asked to quickly reaffirm their participation. Our membership options are: Active, Supporter, and Inactive (see our members page for more information). You are currently listed as Active.

This event will last until the end of January2024. Any Active member who does not respond within the time window will be listed as Unknown on the task force's member list. The names of Supporters will remain unchanged. Please leave your response to the roll-call on the RRTF forums! We hope to see you around! -- ~~~~ ♦ 

22mikpau (talk) 01:18, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adding uncited material to articles

Please do not add uncited material to articles, as you did with this edit to Miles Morales. The first addition is not supported by the cited source, and the second addition has no citation at all. Wikipedia 's Verifiability policy requires material to be accompanied by citations of reliable sources. Nightscream (talk) 01:08, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The first issue does not say that Morales worked for Taskmaster. The only thing that occurs in that issue is that Morales is alerted to some situation in New York involving him. Indeed, in the issue that does explicitly establish a working relationship between the two (issue 2), it establishes that the two have a "deal", which means that they are merely allied, and not that Morales works for Taskmaster. In fact, at the very end of that issue, Morales angrily orders Taskmaster to kill the two Spider-Men, or he, Morales, will kill Taskmaster, further falsifying the notion that the former worked for the latter. All of this again illustrates why it's necessary to cite sources, and to make sure that the text accurately reflects their content.
Again, you worded your passage in the past tense. Why is this? Nightscream (talk) 17:03, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Brad Orchard for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brad Orchard is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brad Orchard until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. joe deckertalk 06:13, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Electrokoopa listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Electrokoopa. Since you had some involvement with the Electrokoopa redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 02:16, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blade (comics) move

There's currently a movie going on at Blade (comics) that you might be interested in since you have edited the article in question recently.★Trekker (talk) 18:42, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy birthday

Artix Kreiger (talk) 13:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability and Citing sources

Hello, Rtkat3. After discussing the issues involving you with other editors at this conversation at my talk page (permanent link), several problem areas have been identified involving patterns of your behavior. Please take the time to review and understand Wikipedia's policies regarding Verifiability and Citing sources. From the situation as described to me by multiple editors, and by my own observations, it looks like you have had ongoing issues with this for several years now, requiring other editors to step in and either correct or revert your errors. What is worse in my mind, is that when some of these editors have reached out to you about these problems, it seems that you will at least respond to the other editor positively and make an initial attempt to change how you edit, but that you quickly go back to your own patterns of behavior. What seems clear to me is that you are going to have to make a change in your behavior, of face the likelihood of being blocked.

If you are ever uncertain on whether a source or a particular edit is valid, you may want to reach out to other editors for help and clarification. Since most of the edits I see you involved in are related to comic book characters, one place to go for help would be Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fictional characters or a more appropriate WikiProject depending on the situation, or you can reach out to an experienced editor that you know for assistance (I will admit that I am not the best person to reach out to for that sort of advice).

Suggestions that I can offer:

  • Avoid adding trivial items to articles, per WP:TRIVIA. We want to focus on the most important aspects of the subject, and therefore any little details that are mentioned once or twice and are never mentioned again should be ignored if they do not become some meaningful, transformative aspect of the character or plot. We don't need a full summary of the entire plot of every TV episode, or of every comic book issue the character has appeared in for the character biography, because brief descriptions of the most important points are more than sufficient.
  • Include citations to reliable sources for the information you include whenever possible. We want encourage the use of independent sources on the character and plot whenever possible, and to discourage solely watching or reading or otherwise viewing the media the character appears in to write about them. This is especially true when including any information about real living people such as voice actors or live actors; you should always include a reliable source to verify that an actor was involved in a movie or TV show. Even though it can be hard to find sources like these, we still need to make an effort to find and utilize them.
  • Two things that we do need to find for every character are: 1) Commentary from the creators, and 2) Commentary from independent reviewers. Good examples of this are what the writer and/or artist were thinking about when they first created the character – and the same sort of thing from creators working on subsequent storylines for what they were doing with the character. Likewise, we need commentary from independent reviewers on what is most interesting or important about the character and how that character has made an impact within the overall work of fiction, and that sort of thing. All of this is part of what we call "real-world information" – i.e., what impact the character has had on the real world outside of the fiction itself, and is actually ideally what we should be focusing more of our attention on. It is true that this is often overlooked by many editors who want to focus on the plot and fictional biography of a character, however that is no excuse to skip those much more important parts intentionally when we have the opportunity to actually make the articles more encyclopedic and less fannish.
  • I would also recommend familiarizing yourself in particular with the finer points of the Manual of Style as it applies to comics, as well as the general Wikipedia Manual of Style. This should help in situations such as when to use italics rather than quotations, when bullet points or subsections are appropriate, how to fill out citations to comic issues properly, and other items.

Based on the discussion on my talk page, and my own review of your talk page history, it seems like several different editors have already reached out to you on the above issues multiple times over the years that you have been contributing here, so I am reaching out to you one last time to ask you to take this under serious consideration. Although I believe you are editing in good faith, people will only assume good faith for so long. I am not going to block you at this time, because I want to give you one more chance to take this advice seriously. If you prove to be unable to make these changes part of your regular editing habits, it is likely that someone will point to this warning I am giving you now, and that an admin will block you, and this may happen sooner rather than later. I have even seen editors blocked indefinitely, or long-term, for failing to show basic competency in editing over a long period of time. I do not want to see that happen to you, which is why I am reaching out to you one last time, with what you can hopefully view as constructive criticism. Thank you for giving this some thought. BOZ (talk) 22:06, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not that worried about it. I might come on their defense. I might not. If you want them to stay you are welcome to defend them. But if many editors feel strongly about it. Personally I think one excuse (it's too much) is not true with the exception of S and T's. Some may be too short though. Jhenderson 777 19:50, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tales of Halloween, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Savage and Pat Healy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Scooby-Doo! & Batman: The Brave and the Bold

Hi. Please don't add new information into articles without a source as you did here. You are welcome to re-add the information to the article again with a reliable source. Thank you! Katniss May the odds be ever in your favor ♥ 04:14, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewing

Hello, Rtkat3.

I've seen you editing recently and you seem knowledgeable about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 10:42, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that you have the "administrator someday" userbox. Reviewing new pages is one of the best ways to develop experience needed to successfully wield the mop. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 10:42, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Rtkat3. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Laura Summer

Hello, Rtkat3. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Laura Summer".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 00:16, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of Warcraft locations for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Warcraft locations is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Warcraft locations (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 02:18, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of Warcraft creatures for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Warcraft creatures is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Warcraft creatures until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 03:48, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of List of Warcraft locations

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on List of Warcraft locations, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discusion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. TL22 (talk) 17:44, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Incessant thanks yous on my edits

Please stop "thanking" me for my edits. Every time you do this, I get a notice for it, and I'm tried to having to read them, especially for articles on topics unrelated to your typical editing habits, like Mistakes WeRe Made, but not by me, which makes it clear that you're stalking my edits, and offering "thanks" for them arbitrarily in order to ingratiate yourself to me. I don't want your thanks, or any message from you, so please stop contacting me. Thank you. Nightscream (talk) 05:07, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]