Jump to content

User talk:Sesu Prime: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SoxBot (talk | contribs)
Delivering Wikipedia Signpost ([[User:|BOT]])
you misunderstood!
Line 1: Line 1:
{
{{Rollback}}
I think you misunderstood my edit, it was not meant to BE vandalism, but to REPORT a vandal, who tried to get my article deleted!
{Rollback}}
{| style="width: 100%; background-color: lightyellow; border: .2em solid gold; vertical-align: top; -moz-border-radius: 2em;" cellpadding="5"
{| style="width: 100%; background-color: lightyellow; border: .2em solid gold; vertical-align: top; -moz-border-radius: 2em;" cellpadding="5"
| style="-moz-border-radius: 1.5em;" |
| style="-moz-border-radius: 1.5em;" |

Revision as of 11:34, 4 August 2009

{ I think you misunderstood my edit, it was not meant to BE vandalism, but to REPORT a vandal, who tried to get my article deleted! {Rollback}}

"Why not add an image to your talk page?" asks Mr. McLion-Meister, "It makes the Wiki Wiki Web mighty purdy-lookin'!"


IT'S SPELLED "Pokémon"


NOT "Pokemon"


NOT "pokémon"


The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I hereby award Sesu Prime this anti-vandalism barnstar for his stellar work in keeping all Pokémon articles free from such incessant vandalism and cruft. Keep up the good work! Artichoker[talk] 21:48, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Hello fellow Wikipedians! Leave me a message at the bottom of my talk page and I'll get back to you on your talk. It's easy! -sesuPRIME


The WPVG Newsletter (Q2 2009)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 2, No. 4 — 2nd Quarter, 2009
Previous issue | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q2 2009, the project has:


Content


Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

Reverts

I have noticed you customarily revert unsourced edits. Why not apply judgement and put a {{Citation needed}} template whenever possible? I refer you to Wikipedia:Verifiability. thankyou, (and keep on the good work) Martin fed (talk) 14:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with this sentiment. The onus is the one inserting the content to provide an adequate source. Mr. Wales even said content that is not sourced should be removed with prejudice. You are doing a fine job Sesu. Artichoker[talk] 15:20, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Wales? and Sesu, why have you retored on Artichoker's page and not here?
Anyways, I wasn't critisizing that particular revert but the custom of reverting by default. It is according to Wiki's guideliness on such instances (non defamatory, non POV) to be cordial, note that a source is missing and then allow enough time to source. Peace. Martin fed (talk) 20:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He was referring to Jimbo Wales, founder and all-around head honcho of Wikipedia. And I didn't respond here because I never do; I always respond on others' talk pages.
I revert a lot of vandalism, test edits, POV, unsourced statements, and the like. It's not my responsibility to hold the hand of every new user who adds uncited material to articles. I almost always place a notice the talk page of users that I revert the edits of to clarify exactly why their edit was removed. These notices have key words wikilinked that will help the user find out exactly how to make more appropriate edits in the future. And besides, the edit of yours that I reverted was to a BLP, which have much stricter policies than other articles. -sesuPRIME 20:32, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As to "It's not my responsibility to hold the hand of every new user who adds uncited material to articles", I fail to see the relevance.
I have reread the appropriate parts of BLP (I advice you to do the same), and I quote "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion" and "Remove any unsourced material to which a good faith editor objects". I haven't reviewed your reverts, but by way of example to the Miyamoto one - was the content contentious? libelious? non factual? did you find the edit objectionable? (probably not) then why revert? for lack of sources? then request one or leave it be. Martin fed (talk) 22:41, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Look, when someone adds unsourced information to an article, I revert it. -sesuPRIME 02:41, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

I just wanted to say "hi", and to thank you for doing such great work on the Metroid: Other M article, so keep up the good work and have a nice day. I also feel like pointing out that you have great taste in games. I Feel Tired (talk) 00:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GI

So you have Game Informer? For how long? « ₣M₣ » 22:32, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I do not remember the issue, but it was about the worst-dressed video game characters. I read it months ago and was disappointed to not be able to find it online. I can only remember it being after mid-2003, but before 2008. Sorry. « ₣M₣ » 19:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I tried to narrow down the issues for you, but its possible it is outside of that range. However, it should be sometime after F-Zero GX's release. Regards, « ₣M₣ » 02:20, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
A scan please, with the appropriate parameters filled out from Template:Citation#Citing journals, newspapers, magazines, or other periodicals. Thanks for your effort! « ₣M₣ » 17:44, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Find someway to get it online, that's usually the easiest way. Like if you have something like a Photobucket account, if not, try using ImageShack or TinyPic. Hope that helps, « ₣M₣ » 22:48, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 July 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:33, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re:[1]

I'm sorry to hear that. Hopefully you're just taking an extended wiki-break, and will be back to editing in the future. The project needs you :) In any case, have fun in your endeavors, whatever they may be. Artichoker[talk] 06:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In fact I just happened to be on Wikipedia randomly at that time ;) Indeed I am also looked forward to the implementation of Flagged Revisions. But was there any particular reason you decided to leave, or are you just burnt-out? All the best, Artichoker[talk] 16:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-Retired?

Why are you semi-retiring? I'm going to miss you if you leave. I Feel Tired (talk) 15:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mario Kart rating

Thanks very much for checking. Guest9999 (talk) 16:26, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Metroid

If after all the hard work to bring MP to the FA I left those {{fact}} tags there... well, I'm not from the US, can't help the VG:RL (got those refs from Metacritic and a Google search). But I have to say, any help to improve other Metroid articles, considering the other main contributor of the series will only accept nominating the series as a Featured Topic (and for that, we need another FA so 1/3 of the Metroid articles have Featured status, and Trilogy/Other M need a PR and probably some expanding), is welcome. igordebraga 03:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AN3

FYI, I have reported User:Valkyrie Red to WP:AN3 for continued edit-warring on Mario and ignoring the talk page discussion at Talk:Mario (in which you have been involved). Regards, MuZemike 21:43, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Legend of Zelda (series)

Greetings. I'm currently wondering about the reversion you very recently made, which stated "unsourced and unnecessary". There was actually a lot of information important to the chronology in that edit, and most of the other information there is not sourced. Should we remove that as well? 72.161.205.236 (talk) 21:12, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the courteous welcome. You are correct; the interview reads "100 years". What irks me about this situation is that I've seen multiple discussions on fan-sites, and most people seem to agree that the interview was mistranslated due to the lack of distinction between plurals in the Japanese language whence the interview came. I also know via common sense that the time between games must certainly be "hundreds" of years. Is there any solution to this quandary? I'm fairly sure having "100" serves only to mislead readers eager to form their own chronologies. You stated that most of the other edits can be considered "extraneous". I most strongly disagree. Here is an edit-by-edit run-down.

+"the actual Legend of Zelda" This is perhaps interesting but useless. I feel it neither harms nor helps the article.

-"the" (context of Seven Sages) I believe this word is very misleading and should be removed, as it implies that there has only ever been one set of Seven Sages, which has not been established.

+"full" (context of Triforce) This change distinguishes between a partial acquisition and a full acquisition, which is very important when one considers the significance of the triforce's status in the timeline. I find this wording more clear.

+"corrupted by Ganon and" (context of Sacred Realm vs. Dark World) Another useless but perhaps just slightly more descriptive edit.

+/-"According to the instruction manual ... Along his journey, he" This edit is important in that it implies that this Link was also featured in another game that immediately precedes this story. A source would be very nice here. Perhaps a link to an online .pdf document of the manual would work.

-/+"eventually ... childhood" This change cleaned up a bit of the language (see above) and provided some missing detail about the ending which helps readers better understand what is now known as the "Split Timeline Theory".

+/-"a united triforce ... defeated by Link" The fact about the triforce being in one piece at the time is crucial. The bit about the ending clarifies the words, "plot to resurrect Ganon". This last modification is really not necessary, but it gives the reader a better idea of what actually happens in the games.

+"In-game ... Hyrule" I feel the apparent references to Ocarina of Time and the following events are most important to the storyline.

+"Ganon ... with" The reference to Vaati here perhaps provides not even enough information to help readers place the story in the timeline. It is important to note the mage's appearance in the game.

+"Ganondorf ... dies" This is perhaps the most timeline-crucial edit I made. The state of the triforce at the end of the game in particular is highly significant.

+"Link" -"A man" This figure has been confirmed as Link by Miyamoto. I felt that the identity of the figure was so incredibly obvious as to not merit a source. If necessary, a source can be added. Thank you. 72.161.241.253 (talk) 05:24, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


In response to the quotation from WP:Verifiability, "Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged", No quotations or material which is likely to be challenged was inserted- that is, unless you are challenging the material as inaccurate, which wouldn't make any sense, as there exists a great deal of information which then also should be challenged and removed. You also state that "Reverting your edit was nothing personal", which I fail to comprehend when you selectively decide to delete my material, leaving the rest intact. Thank you. 207.119.229.137 (talk) 07:07, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


And, finally, sorry about the flighty IP address. I have no control over it. 207.119.229.137 (talk) 07:14, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]




Due to your "flighty" IP addresses, I'll henceforth be responding here on my talk page. And I didn't say the information you added was unreliable (except maybe the "hundreds of years" bit). I quoted WP:V as a response to this:
"most of the other information there is not sourced. Should we remove that as well?".
'Kay? Oh, and I really have to thank you for talking this out with me rather than starting an edit war like many IP users do. Let's get to it:
  • We have no choice but to go with what the source says. Hm. Do you have access to the original untranslated version of that interview? If not, do you know of other reliable sources that say "hundreds of years"?
  • I, too, don't really care either way about "the actual Legend of Zelda".
  • "the", when referencing the Sages in OoT and ALttP, does belong because there are only seven of them in those games. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, meaning we don't write articles to conform to what might happen or even what's likely to happen. It's possible that a future Zelda game will reveal more than seven Sages, and if/when that happens then we will edit the article accordingly, but unless/until then there are only seven of them; the Seven Sages. Plus the games refer to the seven of them as a set.
  • "full" (context of Triforce) - I guess "full" does provide better clarification, especially given that the Triforce is shattered several times throughout the series.
  • "corrupted by Ganon and" (context of Sacred Realm vs. Dark World) - Same as above; I agree with you because it's a bit more descriptive.
  • The words "According to the instruction manual" have to go. Unless contradicted in the game itself, details in the instruction manual are canon so there's no reason to clarify where the information came from. The "after destroying Ganon, set out on a quest for knowledge" bit is fine.
  • "eventually" is important because otherwise it seems like the mere act of Link waking seven years later is what awakens the Sages, which isn't the way it is. The rest of the sentence does need rewriting, and you've convinced me the "Zelda sends Link back" bit is necessary.
  • "a united triforce ... defeated by Link" - Hm. I see this does belong after all.
  • "In-game ... Hyrule" - At first this seemed like fancruft, but I suppose details about the timeline are okay.
  • "Ganon ... with" - Same as the one above.
  • "Ganondorf ... dies" - My problem with this one is the way it's written:
  1. Small typos. The paragraph wasn't indented properly, "free" was misspelled and "dark lord" wasn't capitalized.
  2. "Link, defeating Ganon" should say "Link, upon defeating Ganondorf" or "Link, after defeating Ganondorf". "Ganondorf" should be used for consistency.
  3. "seemingly dies" is speculative. It's not obvious that he actually dies, so without a reliable source stating he dies we can't have this detail in the article.
  • "Link"/"A man" - This is not part of the caption, it's part of the alt text, which is used to describe what the image looks like for those who can't see the image rather than to provide commentary about the image's subject. It should read something like "A man in a green tunic" rather than "Link". For further clarification click on the link.
Whoa! That has got to be the largest single talk page post I've ever made on Wikipedia! Anyway, I hope I cleared some thing up; I know your list on my talk page cleared some things up for me. Cheers! -sesuPRIME 09:57, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

In "The Legand of Zelda (series)"I was having trouble getting a good source and you almost banned me and I just want to say that I knew it was good information and I wasn't trying to be disruptive in any posts so thanks for fixing my post and not banning me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.97.84.197 (talk) 04:27, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 July 2009

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 12:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC) [reply]

First off, that's for the offer. But I just found the issue. But, again, thanks for the offer. I really needed to find the issue. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rufa Article

  • Im sorry im just adding additional references of the said Kapamilya show (Ruffa & Ai) or make another article just Ruffa and Ai article to prevent confusion, confilct or double articles. I far as i know it was a named of a animal (redirect article) using the Rufa article until it was change to a ABS-CBN talkshow in the Philippines with unknown user after me or else separate the article instead and do a favor. This is not a vandalism. (120.28.235.176) 17:41, 02 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.28.209.125 (talk) [reply]

Simon G. Atkins Academic and Technology High School

EB64 alt title

Still got that Game Informer information? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 08:30, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, all I need is the data for referencing, but if there's anything that could potentially be used, such as impressions or unmentioned info, that'd be great. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 08:46, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 3 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 06:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]