User talk:Galliaz

Welcome

Hello, Galliaz, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Kukini 13:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for the welcome and the information, Kukini! I do enjoy editing and contributing to this enterprise. --Galliaz 15:39, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BOP Spoilers

The spoilers posted by me for Birds of Prey were from issue 92 of Birds of Prey. While the book ships next week comic stores can order 1 advanaced copies of certain books that will arrive the following week. The store that I go to had Birds of Prey #92 on hand and I looked through it. So it is not a speculation/spoiler page as you posted in your revisions, it is a factual entry with a warning of spoilers.Dstorres

Thanks for clarifying, Dstorres. I think this crucial "sourcing" information should appear in the entry itself until issue #92 appears on Wednesday. Oh, one more thing: the cover image at the BoP page is still a preview, right? Doesn't the "actual" cover show who the two new members are? (No shadows?)--Galliaz 12:11, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The cover has 3 shaded figures, just like the promo to keep the readers in suspence (hence my spoiler warnings). Dstorres

Thanks for the follow-up info!--Galliaz 12:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flagged/Tagged Entry

The entry on Marina Abramovic is flagged for clean-up. (It also has a NPOV tag.) I've done a considerable number of revisions to the entry: corrected factual errors (for example, the wrong birth date); substantiated any quotes and references (and picture captions); provided accurate biographical information, derived from works written by and about the artist; and worked to provide a neutral/fact-based POV for the essay.

I've provided comments to all of the major edits, and provided information at the entry's talk page. I wanted to have an administrator review the entry to see if the various tags might be removed from it.--Galliaz 17:24, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Galliaz! Anyone can remove those tags, especially since there wasn't much discussion happening on the talk page. If you felt that the article was clean and from a neutral point of view then you could have removed the tags, no need for an administrator. I have removed the tags for you. Thank you for your efforts with the article.--Commander Keane 17:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Commander Keane!--Galliaz 17:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Galliaz, I'm sorry I never got round to replying to your message on my talk page, I've been very busy outside of Wikipedia at the moment, and haven't yet had a chance! I've just looked at the article though, and it would seem you've done a good job cleaning it up — thanks for your efforts! _└^UkPaolo/_talk^┐ 09:22, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, good job. I also tagged the article for cleanup. (Someone removed the tag after UKPaolo added it, I removed it back.) I tried to fix the article myself but gave up in disgust, it was too much of a mess. You really did a great job there. Garion96 ^(talk) 10:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words!--Galliaz 20:46, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Donna Troy

Though I like the work you've been doing for the Wonder Woman article, I must ask you to please note that you have added a factually wrong statement to the Donna Troy article when correcting it for grammar and coherence. In your recent edit, you added that Donna Troy's Post-Infinite Crisis origin seems to be the same as "her earliest one", despite the fact that the first issue of the new series shows Donna as Diana's biological sister and inhabiting Themyscira before Diana's departure (both Post-Crisis On Infinite Earths retcons from John Byrne's run on the second Wonder Woman series). Donna also states at the beggining of the first issue that she was "born of magic", and is shown wearing her Titan suit in a flashback, obviously indicating that the reader is not meant to interpret that the magical twin/Titan child origin has been superseded. --Ace ETP 23:42, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Ace ETP! Your points are well taken; mea culpa on the use of "earliest," and the deletion of the 'I was born of magic' quote from WW #1. Having said that, though, I still consider the text of the OYL subsection to be overly wordy, and unnecessarily jargon-laden; I'm working on a factually correct yet more concise revision.--Galliaz 00:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The current horrible state of that section is mostly my fault. While I understood your intentions to make it better, I changed it back to its previous form due to the Donna Troy article having suffered a lot lately because of some people assuming that Donna's Silver Age origin has been brought back into continuity simply because Diana's Silver Age career has, despite recent books indicating otherwise. They also fail to consider that any change would distance Donna from the Wonder Woman mythos and make her far less special, as she would cease to be Diana's sister (which she clearly is OYL, with some villains even having trouble telling them apart, as in the original magical twin story). Anyway, by all means feel free to clean up my mess. --Ace ETP 00:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good work on Supergirl, thanks a lot! --The Judge 20:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem!--Galliaz 02:17, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

She-Hulk

Please see my talk page for response. --Jamdav86 16:44, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Captain America

Indeed -- clear, concise edits. Bravo! --Tenebrae 04:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's good of you to say; thanks!--Galliaz 11:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Initiative cover

It looks like there's the beginning of some discussion at This page... sorry for reverting your reverts - I guess we should see what the consensus is. 24.136.11.242 02:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologize. I've left my thoughts on this question on the Araña, She-Hulk, and Squirrel Girl Talk pages. I look forward to following the discussion as it progresses, and will, of course, abide by whatever consensus emerges.--Galliaz 02:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Question on tense

I don't understand why you change fictional character HISTORIES to present tense. It does not read well, and is not correct grammar. Would it not be better to use past perfect tense, at least? Look at Ms. Marvel's history, it reads very poorly.

You prefer: "An eponymous series in the late 1970s features Ms. Marvel, casting her as a distinctly feminist hero. After the series' short life span, the character associates with the Avengers and X-Men, although a series of personal tragedies have complicated her career. Throughout the years, she also uses the codenames Binary and Warbird."

It sounds much better this way: "An eponymous series in the late 1970s featured Ms. Marvel, casting her as a distinctly feminist hero. After the series' short life span, the character associated with the Avengers and X-Men, although a series of personal tragedies complicated her career. Throughout the years, she has also used the codenames Binary and Warbird."

I am very concerned that you and others are changing hundreds of entries across the boards, making children read incorrect gramamar.

From the Wikipedia Comics Project's helpful editorial guide: "In order to differentiate between real historical events and the events described in a fictional work, it is appropriate to use the present tense. This is not to say that the article must be devoid of other tenses; rather, the discussion of a fictional occurrence should be anchored in the moment in which the event takes place." http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/editorial_guidelines#Present_tense --Galliaz 22:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

about Civil War (comics)

I see you've done quite a lot of revisions regarding this article particularly the synopsis. I appreciate your contributions, but my concern is that this Civil War article focuses "mainly" on the 7-part mini-series, with tie-ins supporting these "main" 7 issues. There are events covered in the synopsis that didnt happen in the 7 issues, which I feel, should belong in their respective tie-ins and/or article. I strongly feel that these events should fall in their own titles (i.e. x-men's civil war participation goes to the x-men article, or wolverine's civil war participation goes to the wolverine article). The only coverage of this Civil War (comics) are those that happened ONLY in the 7-issues. And at one time, I also noticed Captain America's assassination in the synopsis which is no longer part in the 7 issues. Please share your thoughts regarding this matter. Thanks! †Bloodpack† 15:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with you. The Infinite Crisis entry is organized along these lines. (This is why I drastically compressed the X-Men info, and cut the Cable info entirely.)--Galliaz 16:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I really dont understand why this entry is in the article:
"The X-Men, on behalf of the mutant community, declare neutrality.[13] Acting leader Cyclops feels that the mutants have already been through too much during the Decimation to take a stand either way and survive. Individuals X-Men have their own opinions: Wolverine feels that the act is every bit as racist and oppressive as the Mutant Registration Act, while Bishop feels it's necessary to embrace the act and make sure mutants can continue to police themselves, (lest the truly oppressive regime of his own timeline should come to pass). All members of the 198 and X-Men are already listed in government databases, and were registered by default when the act passed. The now mostly-depowered Morlocks and the residents of New York's once entirely mutant ghetto Mutant Town remained easy targets for hate groups now that they had reverted to more-or-less normal humans. X-Factor Investigations have recently set up shop in Mutant Town, and with the passage of the Registration Act Jamie Madrox, the team's leader, called a press conference announcing that Mutant Town was officially off-limits and X-Factor would protect its residents.

Wolverine begins tracking Nitro the moment rescue efforts cease; he traces Nitro to a cabin in the woods. S.H.I.E.L.D. has also intervened: a team including Wolverine was sent to capture him. Predictably, Nitro incinerates everything within a wide radius of the cabin. The agents die, and Wolverine was reduced to an adamantium-plated skeleton. While regenerating Wolverine overhears Nitro talking to a contact over the phone, informing him of the latest kill. The conversation reveals Nitro's use of Mutant Growth Hormone to enhance his power. Finally regenerated, Wolverine goes toe-to-toe with Nitro, taking advantage of the small radius of safety around his body that prevents Nitro from incinerating himself or anything on his person. The fight is interrupted by a trio of Atlanteans who prevent Wolverine from killing Nitro. The Atlanteans seek to bring Nitro back to Atlantis in order to try him for the murder of Namor's cousin, New Warrior Namorita. Wolverine goes to Atlantis to confront Namor, and ultimately decides to leave Nitro to face Atlantean justice. (Wolveriine focuses on those who supplied Nitro with MGH, determining that the distributor was the corrupt head of Damage Control, a firm that benefited from the massive government contracts generated by the civil war.)

Villains Doctor Doom, Red Skull, Arnim Zola, the Mad Thinker, and the Puppet Master all have insidious plans in the works. The Thunderbolts are invited to spearhead operation "Justice Like Lightning," in which they will capture, and, if possible, reform supervillains. Baron Helmut Zemo has already been collecting supervillains into an army to confront the mounting threat of the Grandmaster and his new Squadron Sinister. The captured villains swell the team into three large squads; more are being trained in a secret mountain camp. Numerous other villains are released under more direct government supervision, including the Green Goblin, the Vulture, the third Jester, and Jack O'Lantern. The villains are kept in check by nanites in their blood which monitor and can also disable them. Norman Osborn, however, has learned the secret to deactivating them.

Crime mistress Ricadonna assists some supervillains in avoiding the act by grafting Skrull tissue onto their bodies in exchange for their assistance in freeing her from prison. The survivors of the experiment — Ferocia, Kingsize, Flame, and a new Blue Streak — gain shape-shifting abilities. Ricadonna later undergoes the same process herself. Hammerhead, on the other hand, sees the tumult as an opportunity to usurp Wilson Fisk as the Kingpin of Crime. A number of super-criminals rally to him, but the Kingpin orchestrates Hammerhead's capture and death."
None of these events happened in the main 7 issues? †Bloodpack† 17:35, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Marvel

It is standard form to explicitly state when a comic book character has been owned by more than one publisher, ususally in the lead sentence. As examples, see Captain Atom, Plastic Man, and - in direct relation to this article - Captain Marvel, Captain Marvel, Jr., and Doctor Sivana. --FuriousFreddy 13:03, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While it might also be argued that an encyclopedia entry should begin by listing the fictional universe in which the character presently operates (for purposes of clarity), I think the opening of the Mary Marvel entry is now clearly and concisely written.--Galliaz 02:46, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Catwoman edits

Oops, I guess you were right, there. My apologies. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 12:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apoligise! Your edits, and prompts for citations, are spurring some nice improvements to the CW entry.--Galliaz 13:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Merriweather/Newmar edit here, we cannot use Imbd as a citation source, only as an external link, because Imdb is notoriously inaccurate for anything beyond cast and crew listings. You need to find a further citation that Merriweather was cast bc Newmar was unavailable.
As well, the Return to the Batcave cast choices need to be cited. Someone might be doing a paper on Newmar, and their teacher or whatever isn't going to allow for them to cite WP; they will, however, allow them to cite an external source quoting Newmar et. al. as cast. I hope you understand what I mean. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 14:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I get it. Rather than have ambiguous or rumor-based info in the entry, I'm in favor of cutting the info down to a bare description of who was actually in the film.--Galliaz 14:23, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Arcayne gave you your out right there. "Imdb is notoriously inaccurate for anything beyond cast and crew listings". Checking, one sees that both appeared. Therefore, you can use the IMDb cite. don't worry, however, as I've already provided 2 non-IMDb citations, to avoid further POINTyness. ThuranX 16:34, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wonder Woman

I wonder if it's time to ask for the article to be locked to force discussion. Between CrytalB4, and JJonz the "gotta have the Weasels" is getting frustrating.

- J Greb 04:04, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe so ... here's my thinking: on the plus side, a lock would certainly put a stop to the frustrating cycle of reversions — which I'd very much like to see happen. On the negative side, though, I don't actually think that locking the entry will lead JJonz + CrystalB4 to engage in discussion aimed at making the entry better, since they haven't yet taken the opportunity to do so.--Galliaz 04:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

True... and as it stands CB4 is on the 3RR report. It's just frustrating to see the weasel/under cut cycle repeated. - J Greb 04:38, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wonder Woman Talk Page

That was simply an error on my part. I thought that you had moved my comments off of the main talk page for those same reasons. Please do not move any of my future comments from that main talk page, that is where I intended for them to be made.--JJonz 06:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JJonz, you're mistaken. Check the edit history. I didn't move your comment, and no one moved your comment from the main talk page. Another editor helpfully placed your comment under the "Garner victories..." section, which is where other editors were already discussing the changes you have been making to the page.--Galliaz 09:13, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom Come

Thanks for the copy-editing. I'm hoping to make this my first non-film project (as I normally work on film articles). I've been putting together a guideline to guide me along. Do you have any suggestions about how to proceed with the article? I'm finding the long list of characters to be unnecessary for the encyclopedic context of this comic book's article. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, Erik. Yes, I think those lists need to be edited out of the entry, too. It should also provide a way of describing the migration of elements from KC into the mainstream continuity without resorting to lists. Here's an additional resource I know of: the most recent print edition of Wizard magazine (#191) has an article/interview with Alex Ross and Geoff Johns in which they discuss the addition of the KC Superman to the JSA. (Though this article hasn't yet appeared on the Wizard website, I'm assuming that it will fairly soon, as does a sizable portion of their printed content.)--Galliaz 19:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Molly Hayes

Hi. We seem to be in an edit war over Molly.

Regarding the bit we keep fighting over, I'm unsure what your rationale is for putting in such a detailed explanation of the Pride right at the beginning. The kids don't find out right at the sacrifice that the Pride works for the Gibborim, the names of the rites, or why the Pride does what they do in the first place, so why clump it all at the beginning? I'm trying to be minimalistic about this and rewrite what you said in the order it happened in the comics without being too specific. I agree that what you put in is important, but there's no reason it should be one of the main paragraphs since I'm trying to center Molly's bio around Molly. I think The Pride's inner machinations should be dealt with in the article when it's absolutely necessary, not before. Can we agree to that? Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 02:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dasbooch! I wouldn't call it a war, exactly. As I imagine the potential reader of the entry to be someone who has never read Runaways, it seems clear to me that an encyclopedia entry about one of the characters should include brief, pertinent info about the character's (evil) parents, and do so as early as possible. (The entry is about providing complete, accurate information, rather than withholding it.) That Molly's parents were members of the Pride is central information about her: readers need to have this info in order to understand the experiences and motivations that are described in the entry. I'd certainly agree to trimming the paragraph, but I feel that info on The Pride needs to be provided to the reader early in the character bio.--Galliaz 10:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I assume that my edit of your explanation of the Pride in Molly's bio was sufficient? ;-) Two questions - why delete the cover to Runaways vol. 2 #21 that I put in the Runaways section of her bio? and second, I'm going to scan a panel from the comics showing Molly using her powers for the "Powers & Abilities" section. Cool by you?

Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 00:02, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the entry as it stands now is good. (Thanks for adding the info on Topher.) I didn't delete the image, which I thought was fine.--Galliaz 03:28, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Symbionese Liberation Army

I responded here: Talk:Symbionese Liberation Army -- Esemono 01:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Esemono!--Galliaz 01:48, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Halle Berry

Please stop blanking introductions as you did here. It is vandalism. Read WP:LEAD. repetitions in later sections are needed. Vikrant 13:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vikrant, I've edited the grammar in the third HB intro paragraph, and have discussed my views on the paragraph's appropriateness for inclusion in a wiki entry at the HB talk page. In future, I'd appreciate it if you could direct your comments to me in such a way that they might initiate or further discussion, rather than serve as stark accusations of vandalism.--Galliaz (talk) 15:46, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Education Program Fall 2012

Hi, Galliaz!

I saw on your userpage that you're a professor at Bryn Mawr College, and I thought you might be interested in participating in the Wikipedia Education Program for the coming term. If you're still teaching a class and would like your students to edit Wikipedia as an assignment, please email me at jmathewson@wikimedia.org to talk more about the program! Thanks! JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 19:55, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]