User talk:Erachima/Archive 09

This archive contains topics 201-225 made on my talk page. Its history on the main talk page ends at this edit.

Thanks

Thanks for your correction and edit summary. I knew there was something I was missing (definately too early in the morning! lol) Crimsone 08:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Subpages

Thanks for the information about sub-pages. I replied in more detail on my talk page. I went back and found an article I recently wrote as a subpage, and moved it. International Organization for Standardization/Countries. Thanks, again. Jerry lavoie 03:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Gotei 13, Insignia section

cc: Ynhockey

The LiveJournal community 'Soul Society' recently barnstormed the flower-identification puzzle again, and seem to've come up with a pretty solid list. I'd like to post this in the article, but feel uncertain about how to compose the paragraph most Wikifully. I'd like to have one or both of you (Ynhockey, tjstrf) beta the addition - I'll post it in my Talk for easy access.

Corgi _talk 10:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, even though sources of information (realistic poster images, native speakers, flower experts) are clearly labelled as such? *frustrated frown* Any way it could be presented, then, so it would work by Wiki standards? At least it gives people some place to start... erm, if that makes any sense.

Corgi 17:29, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

You typed the url formatting wrong so I didn't see it earlier, it just showed up as a 404 error. [?!] Ack! I always have problems with remembering the format, but I thought it had displayed OK. Sorry about that.

Ichigo, of course, doesn't have a division (I'm secretly rooting for 'the Division 14 Living World Irregulars' to become canon, heh), so we can ignore the sunflowers for now. As far as I know, there aren't any more posters than what that one LJ'ist shared; I don't think most of the other divisions are quite as 'marketable', unfortunately. [frown] They don't even Google in English. I'm trying Google Japan, but since I can't read kanji, the search is kinda... dicey. Closest I could get was ブリーチ アニメ (copied from entries here), but since I don't know the word for 'poster' or how to input 'hana' in kanji/katakana, I got stuck.

Corgi 04:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

"Reborn" madness

We're sorry. We just got really pissed off by really stupid arguments that these people give. We'll try to calm down.

Yume no Kishi

Template:WarningsUsage

Clearing the usage section makes the template table appear above the usage section, which wastes some space (see Template talk:Uw-vandalism1). Are you aware of this? Λυδαcιτγ 23:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Is it messed up now? Λυδαcιτγ 23:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Now? Λυδαcιτγ 23:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I need some help

Remember when I was new here and wanted the Sasori article and you said something that made everyone stop arguing about it? I remember it had something to do with the differnent types of Wikipedia article.Sam ov the blue sand 17:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Akatsuki (Naruto)/Archive 3#Why isn't there a real artical for Sasori yet? –Gunslinger47 17:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm back!

I'm back after my Wikibreak.... hopefully things will be better again! --sunstar net^talk 12:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Chill out

Next time you disagree with a minor, subjective edit, I'll thank you not to give an edit summary that reads like a childish quip. And it is subjective - I don't wikilink to common words often - the word breast appears exactly once in that article, linking to it in that one instance is hardly what I would consider often. If you want to discuss something, especially something like that, I'd love to discuss it civilly with you on the talk page of the particular article. If you want to talk down to me in an edit summary, go ahead, but I certainly don't think it's very productive. Cheeser1 06:36, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

• Note: Conversation continued at User talk:Cheeser1 (has been swiftly archived since) and Talk:Homunculi of the Fullmetal Alchemist anime#Sloth's breast?. --tjstrf talk 19:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I get it...

The reason why Bleach (manga) is lowercased and not spelt like BLEACH is because it's not a company or industry like VIZ or GONGO right? If that's the case, shouldn't there be a separate Bleach (anime) like there is for Dragon Ball (manga) and Dragon Ball (anime)? Power level (Dragon Ball) 18:43, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

What about GONZO? That's a trademark, yet, it is titled in all capital letters. If so, it should be BLEACH... Power level (Dragon Ball) 19:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

That's what I was actually trying to point out here. Is there a policy (not guideline) that says something like "an article can't contain capital letters no matter what"? Power level (Dragon Ball) 19:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Those are guidelines, not policies. I asked if there was also a policy that supports this. Power level (Dragon Ball) 19:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I understand. Is VIZ Media in its right place also? Hang on, are you familiar with CheckUser? How do I confirm the rest of this: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Recoome? Power level (Dragon Ball) 19:28, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

My mistake then. In either case, you've outlined it already. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Someguy0830 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

I'm back. Hey, can you move it to Viz Media? I wouldn't know what to say in the edit summary. Power level (Dragon Ball) 20:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for everything! Bye-bye! Power level (Dragon Ball) 20:55, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

AN/I

Chill out, it is knee jerk responses like this [1] that lead to the belief that admins can't take criticism, are part of a cabal, etc. Catchpole 22:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Knee jerk response? That was not a knee jerk response. I read his post, read the thread above in which he was complaining about the admin, and concluded that the thread was nothing but a long string of attacks on people who disagreed with him and an utter waste of our time. So I removed it, just like I would have removed a misplaced personal attack on any other discussion page. Troll threads are actively destructive to the community and encyclopedia, wasting our precious volunteer hours.

As for promoting cabalism, there is no cabal... everyone just is out to get you of their own free will. ;-) --tjstrf talk 22:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Haori in Bleach

Thank you for dropping me a note on why you were reversing my edits. I appreciate that.

In defense of adding the captains' haori colors:

First, the primary reason for adding the haori colors was to mention that Ichimaru's color matches with Aizen's, and Ukitake's with Kyoraku's; the respective characters' close relationships give it some validity, not to mention interest.

Second, the haori colors are fairly consistent within the anime, when they are visible. So, it makes sense to include other captains in addition to the four mentioned above.

Third, the fact that they are anime-only features should not disqualify them from being added to character outlines, since Bleach as a series includes both anime and manga.

However, If you are still conviced that such details are completely trivial, I suppose it cannot be helped. I only wanted to let you know of what I thought, in response to your comment. I apologise if I sound too aggressive in my arguments -- it was not my intention to appear so. Thank you again, and have a nice day.

P.S. I am adding this to both mytalk pages, because I like to have things well-organized. Arandomstudent 08:18, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm hosting a game on my user page.

If have the time go to my user page and see what the game is.Sam ov the blue sand 21:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

No it says nothing about what I'm doing. Good job you have 900 pts.Sam ov the blue sand 22:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikiproject Bleach

Konnichi-wa, Tjstrf-san. I recently made a Bleach WikiProject and it would be great if you could take a look at it and improve it if you can. It would also be great if you would join the WikiProject, since you know a lot about the series, but the choice is completely up to you. Thank you for your time and happy editing! // PoeticDecay 19:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Scratch that last bit. I forgot to bring it up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals, so I'm doing that now. // PoeticDecay 14:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

WP:UTM

Hi, I reverted your edits to {{uw-v3}} & {{uw-v4}}, not for any malicious reasons, and I understand your comments in your edit summary. The reason I reverted is that these have been discussed at some length on WP:UTM and WP:UW and it was decided to keep them all in the same language, not just the vandalism ones for the sake of harmoni(s/z)ation. Regards ^Khukri 22:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey thanks for your reply, I had a look through WP:VAND and if there was ever a more mixed English article I've yet to see it. The first few paragraphs including the titles started off as British English then there were around half a dozen iz's and then it went back to British English again. I've find/replaced all the iz's to is's for now, but as you see from my commentary through out the talk pages. I'm not particularly bothered about which way they are but so long as one or the other just for consistency sake. If you want to change them all I have no problems at all. Cheers ^Khukri 08:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey chill, if it makes you happy have it anyway you like. But I will apologise not knowing american spelling I thought vandalism was with a Z. Though it looks a bit bizarre to me to have vandalism and vandalize on the same page. But hey as I said obviusly concerns you more than me. Regards ^Khukri 10:07, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep my screw up in that regard. I'm beginnning to think however that it may not be just a bad idea to change them all over anyway, as more people will change it to ize than ise, and in the long run it may just cause more hassle than it's worth. Cheers ^Khukri 12:40, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

IP reverting

There seems to be an IP reverting all the article you have edited [2]. You might want to check if you know anything about this person. Gdo01 00:29, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Characters of Berserk is not a stand alone list

Well I go on what is on Wikipedia:Lists#Types_of_lists. It is not an embedded list therefore I believe that it is a stand alone list. Also, every other character list starts with List of, why should the Berserk list be any different? I just want some consistency. --Squilibob 06:34, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see that there are a few more articles like this from those searches - though a lot of the pages in that search are redirects to pages that are List of pages. Thank you for your explanation, change the page name back if you want, I won't change it to a List of page again. --Squilibob 07:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

76.19.13.202

That sounds like a school with a great program. 204.69.40.13 12:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

re:question

I was an experienced anon editor before. If you think my proposal is right, you can support it. If not, object it. Why didn't you welcome a new user but challenge him/her at the beginning? Wikipedia has been on the world for many years already and billions of people have used it. Why should you be so mean to a new user?--Typepage 13:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

That's alright. And thanks for your explanation. I like democracy so I want wikipedia to be more democratic. Anyway the system right now seems run well and I just want it run better. Anyway it's just a proposal.--Typepage 19:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that the administration is different from the edit. The argument that wikipedia is not a democracy is probably right for the edit but not for the administration.--Typepage 19:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for telling me, I probably would not have got confused but thanks anyway! Regards -Tellyaddict 18:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Bleach pages

Just an FYI. The reason for the changes I made was that I was working to clear as much as I could out of Category:Anime and manga characters. Both Hollow (Bleach) and Bount were in that character category as well as the main Bleach category. Not having actually seen Bleach, I trusted the existing categories, and moved both articles into the Bleach Characters category as the category that covered both being in Bleach and being characters. If, as you say, they really are not characters, then they likely should not have been in Category:Anime and manga characters in the first place. But anyway, they are out of that one now, which was my ultimate goal, so I'm fine with them being back in the main Bleach category. - TexasAndroid 20:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Brain Peppers

I already got another admin to block as bad username, which should've been the first thing that jumped out. Obvious troll, I'm sure you'll agree, per his mock bio. – Chacor 09:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

GCOTW

Just wanted to mentioned that Kirby's Dream Land is the GCOTW, and it could use all the help it can get to make it to at least A quality. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review

Please don't remove topics from deletion review: that's vandalism, mate. G'day! --Al Mudi Alharaj Tarentaj 09:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism? No, what's vandalism is wasting our time with joke DRVs. --tjstrf talk 09:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

It's not a joke DRV, it's real, and legitimate. Just because you haven't heard of it doesn't mean it's not verifiable. It is NOT a hoax.. Besides The Game (game) is notable too. Please just let the DRV run, OK?? --Jazrud0-3 09:24, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The only evidence you cited was the absurd claim that your mention of briefsism in the Essjay DRV debate somehow made it notable. That is not a WP:DRV entry, it is a WP:BJAODN entry. --tjstrf talk 09:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Because of Essjay, briefsism has somehow become more notable than it once was. Someone found its Wikipedia page: it's in various papers today! --Jazrud0-3 09:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

No prob

ah ^_^ No problem. I'm glad you told me. Thank you as well. Sorry if it took me forever to reply. Take care. ^^ --伝説のリヂヤちゃん 09:54, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

You are flat out wrong

All of the fair use templates say at the bottom, please provide a fair use rationale. Therefore there is no excuse and all are subject to deletion after seven days. Jay32183 18:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Again that is completely untrue. The fair use templates do not explain why a particular image is in a particular article, which is what the fair use rationale needs to do. The term generic was actually added so that people wouldn't only use it for {{fairuse}} and {{Non-free fair use in}}, and the admins delete any of the fair use images when it come time. Jay32183 19:38, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I actually tag TV screenshots, which cannot be rationalized so easily. Check out this diff [3] for reference. Jay32183 19:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)