This is an archive of past discussions with User:Thedemonhog. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
If you like we can bring this to Images for Deletion or something like that, but I doubt it would be any different from the Ana Lucia situation. I really don't like to waste my time on this kind of stuff, but if you really want to be proven wrong, then ok. -- Ned Scott05:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
This time I honestly believe the season promotional picture of Kate better represents the character than the Tabula Rasa promotional picture. --thedemonhog18:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
For a few months we've both been fighting over these images, and yet I never stopped to properly explain myself. I need to apologies to you for that. I really went about the whole situation in the wrong way, which is probably what caused the confusion in this situation. Sometimes I get too worked up over these things, so I'm sorry for my harsh reactions and comments. I've tried to better explain myself at Talk:Lost (TV series)#Fair use and Lost, so I hope that will help clear some of this up. -- Ned Scott07:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Flashback characters
There has been some revert warring over which characters should be listed for flashback/featured in Lost episodes, and it is being discussed again to either reassert the old consensus or see if there is a new one. I saw you were previously involved with discussions of this, so here's a heads up Talk:Characters of Lost#Flashback characters. Input would be appreciated, thanks. --Milo H Minderbinder22:46, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
You obviously didn't bother to read what I wrote. They aren't copyright violations because I wrote them originally. --thedemonhog22:51, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
The problem with this template is that with a < br > in it, it doesn't fit to an 800x600 resolution (hence me repeatedly removing it, god knows why people keep reinstating it). Also, on pages such as Ana Lucía Cortez the < br > causes problems when the template is squeezed in at the bottom. I hope this can be fixed soon as I am getting bored of fixing it! Number 5723:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Dot and why
The vertical bar is a valid delimiter (LEDES 1998B). See Bullet (typography), "In typography, a bullet is a typographical symbol or glyph used to introduce items in a list, like below, also known as the point of a bullet", we aren't presenting the information in list form, the dot also appears as a square (to me at least), not to mention it's a poor separator imo, where as a pipe reaches to the top, has no odd formatting and is widely used on Wikipedia. Not to mention I don't remember there being any discussion to change it to a dot. Matthew22:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Tom picture
Why do you insist on changing the picture of Tom to one you've uploaded when my one is clearly much better quality? Other Lost-related images are also a high resolution such as this, so it should just be left alone. --SilvaStorm
Sorry about that, but in my defense I could ask you the same question as my picture was there first. Anyway, I like mine because it doesn't have the watermark on it, which I edited out, and I uploaded the picture as lesser resolution because I find that gives a stronger fair use claim. Because you insist, I will upload a full-sized picture of Tom without the watermark and forget about mine. --thedemonhog18:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Nevermind about yours (I just found out that it was deleted), but I will upload a newer higher-resolution version of my image. --thedemonhog18:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, you can't do that. Please see Wikipedia:Fair use. Fair use images, such as this, must not be made available in such a high-quality way that they could be used as a substitute for the copyright holder's original. Large fair use photos are specifically tagged with {{fairusereduce}} to replace them with smaller versions. In the future when uploading fair use images, please do not upload high quality publicity photographs like this one. —dgiestc18:41, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Actually that is my own version of the image. I think you should leave it be from now on, thanks. --SilvaStorm
You're really starting to piss me off
Okay, obviously you've got a grudge against me after all those picture discussions, so can you just leave my work alone, and I'll do the same for you. --SilvaStorm
See Talk:Characters of Lost for why it is too early to create Anthony Cooper. I don't think that I have a grudge against you - we're just in a bad situation right now. It started when I created Tom (Lost). A few minutes after I created it, I was changing the pictures, however we both uploaded them at the same time. Then we got into a revert war over which picture to use. The reason that I kept reverting you was because I had edited out the watermark in mine and I wanted to get some credit for rewriting all of the information on Tom and originally uploading the picture when he was a part of Others (Lost). Then yours was deleted because it was practically identical and was too-high resolution and violating fair use. I thought it was over - until you re-uploaded yours for who knows why and calling it a "better pic" despite this one being the one that I uploaded under a different name with the watermark edited out. Well, that's where I'm coming from. --thedemonhogtalkcontributions00:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I still think Cooper deserves his own page. --SilvaStorm
Impressive work! The page is very well-sourced, avoids "in-universe perspective", meets WP:WAF quite well... If only all the character pages were done so well. Excellent job! - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ02:51, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I know we've had our conflicts in the past, but I just have to say, damn good work on that article. It totally took me by surprise. -- Ned Scott05:01, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Excessively large versions violate copyright, not just Wikimedia policy. Hence putting smaller versions into place - David Gerard17:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Heya, just want to thank you for merging Cindy and removing the Isabel info, again. After I merged Pickett yesterday I thought Cindy needed merging as well, but you did it before I got there :) Cheers, Tphi10:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
User creating pages for all DHARMA stations
This user has been creating articles for every DHARMA station. Please go and help delete them. --SilvaStorm
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Spoilerfix, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 220:28, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Juliet
I think the other image is more representative of her as a character; she doesn't usually dress like she did in her house. --Silvestris04:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I would rather have the image you want, but we gained consensus recently that the character images should be episode promotional as opposed to season promotional. --thedemonhogtalk • edits • count05:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Tips
Hi. Flickr photo copyright can be seen under the "Additional Information" column at the right of each photopage. That photo is indeed copyright ("All rights reserved").
If I might give a little unasked for advice too... ;) The "count" link in your sig is a dangerous symptom of editcountitis! (and it isn't kind to the overworked toolserver (tools.wikimedia.de))
Thanks, I've checked my edit count four or five times since I joined Wikipedia a year ago though. Maybe I should remove it so I don't over work the toolserver. --thedemonhogtalk • edits • count14:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
On your userpage is fine (I have a link to it on mine), it just doesnt need to be in your sig :) --Quiddity17:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Blocked
You have been blocked for your continuing violations of our fair-use policy. Please refrain from uploading or using any more images until you have read and understood WP:FU. --Yamla21:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I have not made many edits lately because my Internet has not worked since June 15 and will not work until June 25. I am at the Vancouver Public Library right now. --thedemonhogtalk • edits21:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I deleted this image because according to the source [2] it is released under a non-commercial license. cc-by-nc-sa. All images (except non-free content) must also be able to be used commercially. Garion96(talk)20:12, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately as I understand it, Flickr users can change the licensing for their images at any time, so although they might have had a usable licence at the time, they don't now and we have no way to check. The best thing with Flickr images is to upload them at Wikimedia Commons, selecting the 'from Flickr' option which should tag the images as needing review, and a bot or admin over there will check the Flickr licence to see if it is compatible. If it is verified, we can keep the image even if the licence is subsequently changed. Hope that helps, mattbr19:15, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Through the Looking Glass - thanks
Hey - thanks for the heads up, but if you're talking about what I think you are, then I already knew. :-) •97198talk04:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
I have given my comments on the Lost finale on the article talk page. I hope they are useful. I note there is also some duplication between the article and the article for season 3.Eiler701:34, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Pilot (Lost)
Thanks. Since the main Lost article and Paulo/Nikki are featured, but all the others aren't quite well, an improvement is necessary. And since the pilot is the most well-sourced episode(most of the documentaries in the season 1 DVDs cover it), and there are two to inspire (Pilot (House) -FA and Pilot (Smallville) - GA), it was an obvious start. If the plot is trimmed and the "Reception" is expanded, maybe another Lost GA/FA can be on the way. igordebraga≠13:48, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I hadn't seen the List of Episodes yet. Also, can you or any of the WP:LOST see the audio commentary for the Pilot? The Production section is fine but could use more detail, and I don't own the DVDs (only rented them). And great job for the season finale I haven't seen yet (airs tomorrow, or at least part 1, in my country), I thought about nominating for GA but since you will try the FA directly, I shouldn't bother... igordebraga≠15:22, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
I haven't had a chance to sit down and read the plot word for word yet, but I'm at work so I should be able to get that done so long as I'm not too busy. Just by glancing over it, it looks better by sight. I had a question. Is everyone in the infobox mentioned in the plot as well? It's such a huge list. I was curious if there were some minor people, who don't get mentioned in the plot (or have nothing to do with the overall plot and can get removed from both places)? The reason I ask is because it seems like a copy of the IMDb list. BIGNOLE (Contact me)12:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
It's not a copy of the IMDb list. Some of them are extras who are really unecessary. I just like to add everyone but I have no problem with taking them away. --thedemonhogtalk • edits17:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I've worked on the plot some and trimmed what appeared to me as unnecessary details. I don't think I changed the meaning of anything, just removed details that would really only be relevant to those that know the show. There was a big bit about the Others dying at the shoot-out, but since they weren't named I assumed they weren't important characters...at least not in respect to the ones that were names at the end of the sentence. The bit about Hugo doesn't seem relevant, other than a hurtful moment because James basically said "you're fat, you're slow, you'll get us killed...toodles". I trimmed some other things, but you changed the order of the paragraphs so I hope I kept it the same. There was so much code that I had to work on it as it's viewed on the page, instead of as it's viewed in the edit box, so I tried to place them back as best I could. Read over it to see if you think it still summarizes the episode without losing anything important. Note, it isn't really all one big paragraph, it just looks that way on the screen. BIGNOLE (Contact me)19:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Charlie Pace (Dominic Monaghan) dives down into the Looking Glass, with the hope of disabling the system jamming outgoing transmissions, but he is captured by resident Others Greta and Bonnie. After Ben hears this news, he sends Mikhail Bakunin to the station to kill the three to preserve the signal jamming. Mikhail arrives and kills Greta and Bonnie, only to be shot through the chest with a spear gun by Desmond Hume (Henry Ian Cusick), who emerges from a closet inside the station.
Charlie disables the signal jammer, and is contacted by Penelope Widmore via video transmission. Penelope informs Charlie that she does not know Naomi, and did not send the boat she claims to be from. Mikhail blasts the window of the jamming room with a grenade, and Charlie locks the door to save Desmond from drowning with him. Before he drowns, Charlie tells Desmond the boat is not Penny’s.
John Locke (Terry O'Quinn), one of the survivors, is shot by Ben Linus.[4] Locke is to commit suicide, when he is stopped by Walt Lloyd. Meanwhile, Ben tells Richard Alpert to lead the rest of the Others to "The Temple", and then leaves the Others with his adopted daughter, Alex (Rousseau's daughter),[5] to meet up with the survivors to persuade Jack not to call Naomi's ship for rescue.
thumb|right|200px|The first appearance of the radio tower in the series
After hearing only two explosions, James "Sawyer" Ford (Josh Holloway) and Juliet turn back to see if they can help Jin, Sayid and Bernard. Jack informs Kate that he loves Juliet, after Kate witnesses a kiss between the two. Ben and Alex intercept Jack's group; Ben informs Jack that Naomi is not who she says she is, and making contact with her boat will be disastrous for everyone on the island. Ben also threatens to kill Sayid, Jin, and Bernard, if Jack does not retrieve Naomi's phone. When Jack hears three gunshots, upon his refusal, he attacks Ben and ties him up. Rousseau meets her sixteen year old daughter Alex, who was kidnapped by the Others shortly after her birth. The shots turn out to be a false alarm, as the three survivors are still alive. Hugo "Hurley" Reyes (Jorge Garcia), who was not allowed to accompany the rest of the survivors because of his weight, drives the van he found onto the beach,[6] and the survivors gain the upper hand, killing the remaining Others.
The trek party, now able to get a signal, arrives at the radio tower. Rousseau disables her distress signal, freeing the frequency for Naomi. Naomi is stabbed in the back by Locke, who threatens to kill Jack if he calls Naomi’s boat. Locke is unable to kill Jack, who communicates with Minkowski on Naomi's boat. Minkowski tells the survivors they will be sending rescue.
Throughout the episode, flash-forwards show Jack has escaped the island. In the future, he is depressed, unshaven, addicted to Oxycodone, heavily drinking, and suicidal. After pulling a woman from a car wreck, Jack contacts Kate and explains they should never have left the island and must return.
That's excellent. Thank you for all the help with my FAC's. There are just a few corrections. Jack tells Kate that he loves Kate after he kisses Juliet. Locke is stopped by what appears to be Walt Lloyd. It is most likely that it was actually the smoke monster in disguise (It's a crazy show, I know). Would you like to make the changes in the article or should I do it? --thedemonhogtalk • edits19:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
The Kate thing wasn't clarified, i thought he was telling Kate he loved Juliet. My bad on that. If that's the only issues, then go ahead. I was hoping I didn't cut important pieces, it's slightly harder trimming plots of things you have not seen, nor know really anything about. Plots are funny things that you tend to always hav eto keep an eye on because people will come in months later and double the size of them. I'll take a look over the rest of the article now that that's over with. I'm a stickler for trying to take care of the IU stuff first, as it tends to be brought up in reviews more often than the real world information. BIGNOLE (Contact me)19:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
What are the other countries? It seems to be intentionally vague only because we aren't sure if there were others. If it's more than just Canada and Argentina, then you shouldn't just link to those two. If those two are the only ones you have verifiable evidence to support that it was aired as a two part show, then that is what should be said. BIGNOLE (Contact me)20:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
I left another comment on the FAC about the songs. As for the reception section, I'll read that as soon as I get home from work, in about 4 hours. I glanced at it, and it looks better by eye sight. If it reads the way my eyes see (if that makes sense) I'll have no problem supporting the article. BIGNOLE (Contact me)17:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the barnstar (I've never received one for an FAC review before) and for the compliment, it means a lot. You did great work on the article, and I appreciate you taking criticism from other editors, as that's usually the hardest part of Wikipedia. Keep up the good work. BIGNOLE (Contact me)22:45, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I'll echo Bignole's compliments here - I think you have done good work. I removed my oppose because I think my objection was duly considered. However, I still feel the scope of interest is rather narrow and that the article remains inaccessible to readers without prior knowledge - this explains my lack of support. Nonetheless I wish you well and perhaps you might consider turning the more generic article about the series into an FAC - readers might have more context. Nonetheless, accept my cimpliments on your solid work and solid attitude. Eusebeus23:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey, what do you think about removing the "Fictional History" section of Others (Lost)? It's entirely a plot summary found in the episode articles, in my opinion. As you've seen with the DHARMA stations page, I'm trying to crack down on these plot summaries so our pages won't get deleted. If we removed the fictional history section, we can add a 'creation' section like on the DHARMA page. -- Wikipedical03:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I notice that you are a member of WikiProject 24 and as such I would like to draw your attention to [3]. It is someting I feel quite strongly about, that would affect a large number of articles on 24 characters, which I would like the opinions of others on. asyndeton19:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Template:Lostnav - width
Regarding this edit: I think bodystyle=width:auto is enough to take care of the template's width, whereas liststyle=width:auto tries to change the width of the list part (the right part) of the template. And that looks rather messy in my browser/resolution/etc. Was my version of the template full width on your resolution/browser/environment? Best regards, Fred Bradstadt20:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I changed it from "airdate" to "broadcast date" because it is better, more professional English. "Air" in this context is used as colloquial slang for "broadcast", in a limited number of countries. And we should not choose slang terms unless there's a specific reason to do so. Please tell me your reason. Thank you. EuroSongtalk20:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Thank you for your reply. I see your point. Okay, I have changed the text to "First broadcast" - which has the same number of characters, and therefore does not skew the balance of the template. EuroSongtalk22:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Image:Lost_cast_(season_3).png listed for deletion
I reverted back to the image that was there. The widescreen version leaves unnecessary "dead space" to the left, that makes the image smaller in the infobox. If there was something in the space, I could see a reason to have the widescreen shot, but it's just a close up of Clark. BIGNOLE (Contact me)23:01, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Commas and periods don't go in front of quotation marks in those instances. That's a title, identified with quote marks, and not a quote from a person. BIGNOLE (Contact me)23:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
"His name is Anthony"
Tony is short for Anthony. --SilvaStorm —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 09:43, August 23, 2007 (UTC).
Yep, I figured that out about halfway through and that's why I stopped and made a sandbox. I'm going to go to the various sites like Emmy.org once I get home in a few days. Thanks. -- Wikipedical03:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Hippo edits
Hi demonhog, I just reversed your edits on Hippopotamus. There's no policy or guideline that says images need to be right aligned, and it's actually encouraged to have some images on the left to make the article more visually interesting. Also, I often put academic journals as redlinks because most academic journals should have articles, and red links help editors know that an article is needed. There is actually an entire project devoted to this at Wikipedia:List of missing journals and we're just trying to help that effort out. Cheers! --JayHenry18:04, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I`m not going to review it myself, but I think it clearly fails the stability requirement because the season hasn`t aired yet and the page will change quite considerably in the next few months. I`ve seen several pages fail because of that, such as the 2008 Summer Olympics. As for the other season pages, perhaps you could add an episode list and try for FL status with them, there are 2 Simpsons seasons that are FLs. -- Scorpion042220:43, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
The user who failed it is a good user, but I have noticed that he will pass or fail articles immediately after they are nominated. One article I nominated was promoted 11 minutes after I nominated it. There is a GA reviewer of the week award which goes to the one who reviews the most and a lot of reviewers jump on pages that seem like obvious failures in order to bump their totals.
By the way, would you object to me changing the format to include a chart like The Simpsons (season 1)? I have FLs for 4 different WikiProjects, and I think with some work, there is no reason why the 3 seasons of Lost couldn't hit FL status. -- Scorpion042221:47, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
What was the issue with listing episodes and summaries? Besides, that discussion was over a year ago and it looks like it was more over whether each episode should have its own page or not. I think seperate season lists are useful, as you can include stuff not mentioned in the master list, like extended plot summaries, writers, directors, guest stars, etc. -- Scorpion042222:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
There is one thing we will need if we will get the season pages to FL status: a reliable source for the writers and directors. In the case of The Simpsons, there are several good books that we could use as well an excellent BBC website, but in this case I'm not sure if there are any sources other than IMDB, TV.com or fansites that would have the information. Any ideas? -- Scorpion042220:13, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Usually saying "it's in the episode" doesn't work, but I guess it's worth a try. I'm not familiar with many Lost websites and I thought it would be handy if there was a reliable source out there. -- Scorpion042222:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I'm done with the plots but some of them are longer than I'd like. I basically tried to keep it to essential info only, but sometimes explaining things so people can understand it takes a lot of words. I've tried to keep all of the major plotlines of the first season and explain them as they go along, I even removed some of the minor ones, like trying to find Rousseau's signal. If you could take a look at it for me, I'd appreciate it. Now, I've just got to add some production info, awards and sources, then it will be ready. -- Scorpion042223:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I have finished expanding it and have moved the page to the mainspace. There isn't much production info because I didn't think that there was really anything that was too specific for the main Lost page. I think it's just about ready to go, I just have to fine tune it. -- Scorpion042217:04, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I've tried shortening them a bit, but it's not easy. A lot of the sentences are short and are along the lines of "____ does this. ____ does that." and I would prefer it if the sentences were more flowing. I think everything essential to the main storylines is in there and it would be difficult to trim it a lot more without cutting some important stuff. -- Scorpion042218:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Reply
I kinda got sick of the fluff and decided to go to a simple page for the time being. Anyway, it looks like season 1 might not pass, although according to that guys logic, practically every other episode list where the episodes have pages would have to be delisted. I'll ask a couple other FLC regulars for their opinions. -- Scorpion042222:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
I noticed you mentioned you are reading Lyra's Oxford. Have you read His Dark Materials? Well I guees you have, and I just wanted to say it is MY FAVOURITE TRILOGY!!!!
Wowowowowow! I read it two years ago (so I have forgotten a lot of the plot) but am still in love with it. I can't wait till the movie, which is coming out in December!
Ditto! It is going to be sooooooooo great! Daniel Craig and Nicole Kidman are perfect for the roles, and the random girl cast as Lyra is just how I envisioned her. I can't wait! And oh yea, they're going to make a movie of the 2nd and 3rd book as well, but that all depends of course on the financial success of the first movie...but I'm sure it's going to be a hit! (Wikirocks215:06, 28 September 2007 (UTC))
Reply
Sorry, but I try to avoid voting in FL/FACs for projects that I'm a part of, unless I have some kind of constructive comments. The page looks very good though and I guess I should add the production codes to the season 1 page. -- Scorpion042201:32, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for being so reasonable about the whole Featured Article Date Request situation. I think the article on the Office is well written and would be great on the Main Page, sounds like Raul does too. Ruhrfisch><>°°04:01, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
My apologies for undoing your edit a second time. I have to check the book now, but I worked on adding some referenced information for more than an hour, and the one word you changed and saved minutes before I did wouldn't allow me to save the changes. "Thomas" was reflected in my update, although I'm not sure of its importance. --Moni319:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)Moni3
Good work on all those changes. I hope you did not have to make the changes a second time due to an edit conflict. Thomas is the first word of chapter 19. –thedemonhogtalk • edits • box20:04, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Karnataka
Can you please provide me the link to the policy which states that map cannot be used in TFAs? I want to learn more about it.
Please respond in this page itself. Thank you. - KNMTalk01:53, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
You either nominated a WP:FLC or closed such a nomination recently. As such, you are the type of editor whose opinion I am soliciting. We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 12007, voting starting December 12007 and main page appearances starting January 12008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual content will resemble the current content at the featured content page. Such output would probably start at the bottom of the main page. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:24, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Now that the master list, as well as the pages for seasons 1, 2 and 3 are promoted, we could be looking at an easy FT for "Seasons of Lost" (or something along those lines). We can include the season 4 page, and get it excused for not being an FL due to the instability of the article. What do you think? -- Scorpion042203:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Who's gonna nominate? Me or you? I already have a succesfuly FT nom under my belt (plus they are annoying as hell to create) so you can go ahead. -- Scorpion042203:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Let's just call it "Seasons of Lost" for now and see what the commentors say. The master List of episodes will be the main page. -- Scorpion042203:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I can ask you the same question. Over at the Lost WikiProject, we use episode promotional pictures for character images. Episode stills better identify the character than season publicity pictures, in which the actors are often posing and wearing clothes not worn in the show and episode stills are also more aesthetically pleasing than cropped screenshots. I did not think that anyone would object, so I did not discuss it. –thedemonhogtalk • edits22:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough; however, i disagree with your assessment that protional stills clearly show the character and seem eminently useful as placeholder images. I do agree that subsequent images culled from screenshots are eminently more useful. - Arcayne(cast a spell)23:40, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Heroes images
Hi. I have reverted two of your image uploads on Edend McCain and the Haitian because I thought they were very poor images, used in a feat of desperation. After checking on a Windows, it turns out that the two pictures don't display properly on Safari. I haven't seen Eden's one properly yet, but the Haitian one is actually very good. However I don't think we should use them if they won't display for some people. Sorry if I seemed like I was just reverting you for the fun of it. asyndeton22:40, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I meant that I thought, in Eden's case at least, the philosophy 'any image is better than no image' was adopted. Again, I didn't mean to offend if I did. asyndeton22:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
sorry
sorry about the spoilers i am new so i didnt understand about citing sources . also thanks for the wikiproject lost tip and i would recommend that you check out lostpedia if you havent already. also i was wondering weather there is any point in me putting in the confirmed episodes titles for the first three episodes of season 4 or should i wait until it starts broadcasting. BERTIE LOST FAN22:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Epbr123 would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Epbr123 to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/thedemonhog. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 17:54, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Now that my project is fully up and running, I though you might want to consider the four main benefits of my method over the one that you seem to be supporting:
There is a set of orphaned articles for persons who do not have any featured lists of their own or persons that would like to take responsibility for more. Anyone can nominate such orphans. This benefits WP by getting people involved in list articles that might not have active editors to update them or defend them against vandalism. Please consider adopting one of our orphans.
Each list will be encouraged to respond to commentary and feedback during the candidacy period, which will hopefully improve the quality of the articles.
Articles without pictures will be encouraged to find them. E.g., List of Harry Potter films cast members had no image before its nominator added an image for this experiment. This type of thing, of course, improves the project.
Articles are encouraged to add relevant projects to their talk page. This alerts other project to articles that they would likely have an interest in and would be able to either improve or protect.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 17:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Good luck in your RfA! Although, a heads up, you might want to take down that "please vote at my RfA" notice... it could be considered canvassing ;) Anthøny00:42, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
I really do hope you try running again for adminship in the future. You are a great editor, and my oppose was very regrettable. :( Jmlk1708:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
It's a pic of Rashida as Karen, so I think it should be used 2 both ficitonal Karen and real Rashida.
Did the person who added the image decree 4 it 2 only be used 4 ex of fictional tv character Karen and not real\actress Rashida Jones? Or is that the decree of whoever took\owns the picture? I asked the pic uploader on their page but they've not been on wiki in awhile.
Thx. 70.108.126.66 (talk) 02:13, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia guidelines say that that non-free picture is of a fictional character, so it can be used in the fictional character's article. However, it has been decided that it is possible to get a free picture of the actress, so that non-free picture should not be used in Jones's article. I recommend reading (parts of) non-free content guideline and edit war policy. The latter tells users not to continuosuly revert others' edits and will help you not to get blocked. –thedemonhogtalk • edits02:22, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Your RfA was unsuccessful
I am sorry to inform you that I have closed your RfA as not demonstrating a consensus that you should be made an administrator at this time. Do not be too disheartened - many of our finest admins were unsuccessful on their first attempt. I hope you will take onboard the concerns raised by those opposing and will consider running again in the future when you have more experience. Best wishes, WjBscribe00:07, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
31-14 isn't a consensus? That's not what they taught us in civics class! Congratulations on getting 69% of the yes/no votes. In the vast majority of electoral systems, this would have been a victory. Your answer to #6 resonated with regular Wikipedians who want editors, not wikilawyers. Unfortunately, a certain segment of Wikipedia wants Adminship to be an exclusive club and looks for any opportunity to oppose candidates. :( You've certainly proven your eligibility for the role, and I look forward to supporting your next application. We need more editors like you (and less of the people who decide what a "consensus" is). DOSGuy06:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
DOSguy, I hope that you realise that once an admin, thedemonhog will be one of the people who will have to decide what the consensus is. That's what we have admins for. Otherwise, all would be a neverending discussion. For further reading, see m:The Wrong Version; substitute "version" with "consensus", and most of the article remains true. Samsara (talk • contribs) 06:59, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I made that statement to support and encourage thedemonhog following her excellent RfA, which was quite successful other than not being considered a consensus. (To paraphrase a Supreme Court Justice, a consensus is like pornography: I won't attempt to define it, but I know it when I see it.) I'd prefer not to fill up her talk page with anything other than words of encouragement but, for the record, I trust thedemonhog to make wise decisions as an Administrator, and that includes decisions about when a consensus has and has not been reached. :) DOSGuy08:22, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thedemonhog, I hope that you'll seek opportunities to broaden your experience. BTW, being an editor's editor is not a sin - people complained at my RFA that I didn't have enough user talk edits, and I'm as fine a bastard as you could wish for, even if I say so myself. Greetings. Samsara (talk • contribs) 06:59, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I have moved the image you uploaded of Adam Monroe in the present time as Image:Adam Monroe2.jpg; I don't think it's appropriate to have the image called "Takezo Kensei" when it's not of him in his role as Kensei.—Random83220:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: Your username
Thanks for notifying me that I can change my username. I thought it was taken, but I guess I was wrong....silly me. Anyways I just wanted to say thanks!! Best user ever! lol (Wikirocks2 (talk) 09:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC))
Thanks… but
Thanks for welcoming me...but I am not new. I have been welcomed before a long time ago. Occassionally I celar my talk page and just let it archive in the history section...but thanks I guess. Kind of weird. Any particular reason you were looking on my talkpage anyway? just curious--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 18:55, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
For fun? You have to understand, Chrisisinchrist, that she finds odd things "fun". She also enjoys stamp collecting and late-night re-runs of MASH. And another word of advice, don't mistake her for someone with a sense of humor either. 13:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.232.196 (talk)
Hi, could you please tell me where ABC have confirmed the titles of "The Beginning of the End" and "Ji Yeon"? --SilvaStorm —Preceding comment was added at 03:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
In reference to the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Today's_featured_article/requests#Suggestions_for_TFA, I think we should go ahead and create a long range TFA request page. See Wikipedia:Long range TFA requests. This is essentially grassroots activism for changing the TFA process, as opposed to waiting for a change to be imposed from above. Basically, what we are doing is the reverse of Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests – instead of trying to get an article TFA'ed sooner, we're saying, Hold off on TFA'ing this article until this relevant anniversary comes up. This is in accordance with the spirit of the comment left at Wikipedia_talk:Today's_featured_article/requests#The_Raven.3F. I propose that as we create FAs, we start adding them to this list and if a lot of people do so, then it will be indicative of a forming consensus that this is a good system for requesting TFAs to supplement the existing system.
See also Wikipedia:Featured_articles_that_haven't_been_on_the_Main_Page. Given that there is a queue of 737 FAs waiting for TFA, an average of half a year is not a long time to wait. Obviously not everyone is going to get their way if there are competing requests but I think this is a good way of organizing and expressing preferences as to which date to put FAs on the main page. Sarsaparilla (talk) 03:29, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
diff I'm going to step back from it at this point and see if other editors want to provide any input. I haven't researched to see how the "Raul's approval" thing came about - apparently his current relationship to the FA process is analogous to what Jimbo's relationship to the overall Wikipedia was a few years ago, in the sense that he promulgates policy. I have wikilinked to WP:LRR from WP:VP so hopefully that is enough coverage. Sarsaparilla (talk) 22:35, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey
Groovy new sig, feeling a little festive after the holidays, are we? And congrats on Greatest Hits - it's going slow, but it's getting there. :) •97198talk10:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I have removed the cast image from this article, as it breaks WP:NFCC. The image has no relation to the episode list, and therefor does not meet fair use criteria. The image may be better suited on List of Heroes characters. — Edokter • Talk • 21:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Not really... a fair use image must have some relationship to the article's content, and since the article deals with the episodes, not the cast members, it fails WP:NFCC#8. — Edokter • Talk • 21:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
That is not enough. There must be a direct corrolation between the image and the article's content; the article does not describe the characters, but the episodes; the image does not add any critical explanation to the text. But like I said, it may be better suited at List of Heroes characters. — Edokter • Talk • 21:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
