User talk:ZeWrestler/archive3Deletion of picturesMost of them were blurry, and compressed in the wrong format, which was jpg. A screenshot of an old game can be compressed in png format without being lossy at all, even better quality than jpg. – DarkEvil 21:27, July 22, 2005 (UTC) Question about Final Fantasy TemplateHello. I've got a question about FF Template: why did you removed "Documents, Manga, Fan made games" from the template ( http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AFinalFantasy_series&diff=19451328&oldid=19441438). I'm not angry, no, but just curious. Leider my English doesn't let the comment "rv fancruft" be clear for me ;). I can understand why to delete "fan fames" - those aren't the official ones. But documental films? Beyond Final Fantasy, FFVII Digest, Distance - FFVII:AC - those are Square(Enix)' movies. There is an official manga too (according to Anime News Network). Why remove them, then? This is some official stuff but not very common or well known, so some piece of information in a templete could be helpful to learn about it. E.g. in Polish Wikipedia we have almost everything (but who really knows...) what connects with FF (http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Szablon:Final_Fantasy). Maybe it takes a lot of space but templates are always below the main article, so who cares ;) So wouldn't be a good idea to include these things also in English template? If not - then OK. But I'm really curious, why :)--Joanna Kornas 21:12, 23 July 2005 (UTC) GCOTW
Jacoplane 11:11, 25 July 2005 (UTC) FF6 peer reviewI was kind of hoping we'd get more of a response from the CVG peer review. Ideally I'd like to wait until we hear more on that front, but I dunno, really. – Seancdaug 18:05, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
Improvement driveI'm curious, why did you remove several edits and nominees that should not have been removed from the improvement drive. --ZeWrestler Talk 18:50, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
I originally uploaded that picture months ago, though. Image:Kimahri Ronso art.jpg was uploaded just last week. ‡ Jarlaxle 19:59, July 26, 2005 (UTC) re: Image:Cquote1.png_and_Image:Cquote2.png — Uh, sorry guys, I really don't understand what you mean by what you said on my talk page. But if it helps any, I made the quotation marks for some quotes I was going to use (but in turn never did). They were made in Photoshop and they are indeed my creation. I really don't know which image tags to use, but if they're any bother, tell me and I'll file them for deletion. Cheers for letting me know.. uhh.. what you did :D — CuaHL 20:34, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
DisturbedI don't know what you're smoking, but Disturbed is definitley nu-metal! --User:151.201.251.178
Ok, I did! Look at the definition of Nu metal. Disturbed almost exactly fits that. They are nothing like metal, dude. Cinema COTWHey, I notice you do a fair amount of work with a number of COTWs and improvement drives, etc. I just wanted to let you know that I (for better or worse, I suppose) rebooted the Wikipedia:Cinema Collaboration of the Week by essentially starting over with rules more alike to other established COTWs such as WP:GCOTW. Please take a look at it and make any changes you feel are necessary. I'm hoping to get more support for this COTW so that it is as lively as others, notably GCOTW. Thank you. K1Bond007 06:56, August 5, 2005 (UTC) link removed : phishingSo, there is a bit of debate on links on the phishing wiki page. The page has a great deal of information on phishing and it is worthy of a discussion of solutions that may or may not work. For example, sharecube.com/whitepapers.html has an article on why SSL, certificates, even image recognition don't work as anti-phishing solutions. The purpose is to foster public debate and enhances industry understanding. The page had a lot of download-my-add-on-solution in a producty category. I am cool on removing corporate links, even informational, but it should be a stated/understood policy. Comments can be sent to mike /at/ sharecube /dot/ com. Thanks ReferancesI replied on the peer review page the best I could. – DarkEvil 15:05, August 8, 2005 (UTC) Oh yeah, it'll be ready for a regular peer review, the page will have its references and the censorship version with references proves to be encyclopaedic material which makes it non-gamefaqish. Other sections are good too and contain less fancruft material than before. Orphaned imagesYou could be either talking about images like Image:Naocho.png which aren't currently used but they will later be integrated in the bestiary. or you could be talking about repeated images like Image:Magic Pot FFV.png or Image:MagiUrn FFVI.png from which I proposed to delete one of them since they are real unneeded duplicate (seems the FFV one did got deleted). Or you could be talking about nearly all my bestiary images, which are currently used, but not shown as so by the wikipedia software. They are used by clicking on the game's name in the Final Fantasy bestiary and can be easyly missed. This is why Cuahl wanted a new design. – DarkEvil 16:31, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
Some time ago, you supported the nomination of American Old West at the COTW. I have now renominated it at the new US Collaboration. If you are still interested, you can support the article with your vote there!--Fenice 08:54, 10 August 2005 (UTC) Phishing rationaleThey seem good to me. After all, you've included pretty much all that can be said and they're not emails from the most legitimate companies. The rationale is good everything is correct. – DarkEvil 15:58, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
fair use rationaleSure, no problem. I might not have time to check them all tonight though. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 20:32, August 11, 2005 (UTC) welcomeThanks for the welcome. I've made a few edits in the past, and I have decided to stay. I would like to point out that the topical index page has a notice on it saying it is obsolete. Thank you. G Clark 18:24, 2005 August 13 (UTC) Brave New WorldPeer review sounds like a good suggestion, you're right. X) I'm still learning the ropes here, so let me ask you - Do I withdraw the FA nomination, then submit it to peer review? Or should I submit it to peer review and let the FA vote run its course? Thanks. :) --User:Jenmoa 21:38, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
Red fox imageWhy do you keep reuploading my edits to Image:Red fox with prey.JPG? I can't see any difference except that instead of saying it's been uploaded by Fir0002 it says it has been uploaded by ZeWrestler. --Fir0002 11:31, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
March of the PenguinsThere is a current discussion on The March of the Penguins about the proper name of the article. The English title is "March of the Penguins"; however, someone has stated it should be "La Marche de l'empereur" since that is its original French title. Apparently there is some precedent for leaving foreign films in their original title. Anyway, thought you should know so that you can add your input on the discussion since you are the original author of the article. K1Bond007 20:00, August 15, 2005 (UTC) Re:Learning twiceGood observation, the page was indeed error. I have corrected it. It had skipped the fairly successful reproduction COTW, though it again was one that had originally been listed during the one per week period. - SimonP 18:00, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
US Collaboration of the monthYou have voted for [[{{{1}}}]] on the USCOTM. It was selected to be this months's collaboration. You are invited to help to contribute in order to improve [[{{{1}}}]] in any way possible. --Fenice 18:42, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
Lets go phishingThere are a couple more things I can think of that could be added:
I think then it should be good to go, no doubt more stuff will pop up when its on FAC.--nixie 00:58, 18 August 2005 (UTC) On your User PageJust thought I'd ask if you noticed that you've mispelt (Oddly, I don't know how to spell mispelt) the word "article" as "artical" on several occasions on your user page. Was that done on purpose, or is it a gigantic overlook? --Pookythegreat 06:23, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
Columbine High School massacreThe section "aftermath" elaborates on the Guerra Documents a bit more. Will this be sufficient, or do you think it still needs a bit more expansion? PRueda29 - 16:00 23 August 2005 (UTC) Alright, I expanded it. Please check it for me to make sure it's ok. - PRueda29 16:43 23 August 2005 (UTC) re:Featured picture ratioThere isn't really an exact ratio, I prefer a 70/30 ratio at least, however I don't hold exactly too that especially if there are mitigating circumstances and/or there are good reasons to promote or deny. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 19:51, August 23, 2005 (UTC) PhishingIts really improved and you've done a great job on it - so I'll see you at FAC! --Ryan Norton T | @ | C 14:44, 24 August 2005 (UTC) Lots more work needed on phishing, I think, but I've done my best to reword and restructure it with a fresh eye. There's some good content there to build on. Thanks for the comment. -82.33.52.78 12:40, 28 August 2005 (UTC) Hi, ZeWrestler! Thanks for your comments at the wolf peer review. The article is now a Featured article candidate; please vote as you see fit. Thanks again, Sango123 20:56, August 24, 2005 (UTC) FF 6Hey ZeWrestler, I've been looking at the FF 6 article and I think it is ready for Featured Article status but before you nominate it I would suggest either creating articles for the red links already in the article or removing the links. I would myself but I don't really have much background on the subject of those links. Anyway I'm crossing my fingers that FF 6 will make it to featured article status, Derktar 05:07, August 27, 2005 (UTC).
no probPretty standard response for empty "no" votes. In FAC, we want cosensus, not a vote count- all objections to FAC must be fixable- it's a rule, and a very useful one for an FA nominator. (You might need to use it again, if people write objections like "it's not a good topic for an FA") I'm sorry I can't vote for FF6 however; though I absolutely loved the game, I don't think the article is that exceptional (sorry) Borisblue 18:25, 31 August 2005 (UTC) Improving FF6I think his points are (mostly) valid, actually: the censorship section, in particular, is a little out-of-control, and we may have overloaded the page with images from a layout perspective. I take issue with his infobox comment, for the reasons I've stated on the FAC page, but I'm going to sit down and see if I can address his other comments right now. – Seancdaug 02:00, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
|
Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia