User talk:Rehevkor/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Re: Myst

Thanks! It's shaping up nicely, the only thing I am missing is information on the game's reception. If you know of any old magazines or whatnot that had reviews, I'd love to know about them. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 19:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

...And thanks for the barnstar! Hopefully Riven will be ready for FAC before the end of the month. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 19:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Myst soundtrack orig.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Myst soundtrack orig.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 11:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Coheed and Cambria "Trivia" section

I have no problems with this edit. The type of information you deleted is discouraged on wikipedia and, furthermore, is somewhat irrelevant to the over all page. If you continue by deleting the rest of this section, please discuss it on the talk page first and consider incorporating the deleted information into the article. ŁittleÄlien¹⁸² (_talk\^contrib) 02:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

"My December (song)"

Why does the article have to be deleted? There was one before. I only want people to know as much about the song as possible.

Many bands, like Nirvana and the Beatles, have B-sides with Wikipedia articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tezkag72 (talk • contribs) 20:06, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

RE:Article tags

All the articles are very poorly sourced including Fear Factory. For example FF has almost no sources until Obsolete. And the later history is very poor sourced. Every single sentence should be sourced. Have a look for example on Slayer or Red Hot Chili Peppers to have a picture about how a sourced article looks like.--  LYKANTROP  16:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right. Cheers.

PS: That envelope you use for your signature is really cool. I just had to use it too - sorry. :) --  LYKANTROP  ✉ 17:16, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

HL Ep. 3

Sorry about the rumor thing, I guess I put too much bias into it. -[[bitdefuser] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bitdefuser (talk • contribs) 15:51, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Dates on X-Files article

Hi. That quote is referring to "Date elements that do not contain both a day number and a month". See the sentence above the one you quote. Linking the full date, as I did, allows the MediaWiki software to format the item according to the date preferences of each individual user. See MOS:SYL for more information. All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 13:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Portal

Thank you for your contributions to Portal (video game). However, on the Steam forums I and many other users of Steam came to a conclusion that "us" refers to GLaDOS and Chell, meanwhile "them" refers to the Combine, Resistance and possibly Gordon Freeman. You deleted it and labeled it as original research. So I have reverted it back to my version. Anyway, thank you for your contributions. If you have anything to say about this, please post on my talk page. --TONO459 (talk) 09:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

One of the devs was there at the discussion and he agreed. So I beleive it is fact. --TONO459 (talk) 14:18, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Portal: Still Alive ref

Chris Remo, the source of the story, has a reliable history; used to work for Shacknews, now does a few other things but still should be considered reliable. --MASEM 13:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Dr. Horrible

Hi,

I saw that you erased the link to the Wikia I placed in the article. I agree with your point, that it is still not quite as worthy to be added to the article, but my question is, when you think it will? What kind of content will it need to have in order to guarantee its inclusion in the article?

Thanks in advance,

--Dreyesbo (talk) 17:44, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

X-Files (film)

Hello,

I noticed you have removed my link from the X-files page. This page did not have a link to a trailer so I added one. This link did not carry any advertising or any 3rd party branding. Why was it removed?

Thanks,

Chris

--User:Cperrott wiki (talk) 15:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

So, if there is no official site link, it would be ok to add an external link to a trailer? I think people who are reading the wiki page about the movie may want to see a trailer of the same movie.

I may have mistakenly added the wrong link on one of the pages but not all of them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cperrott wiki (talk • contribs) 07:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Death Magnetic

Yeah, it's no problem. I wasn't trying to be uncivil when I said it anyways, that's why I linked to it as well. It's true though, the guy was violating a lot of policies, and was obviously just doing it to provoke that kind of attention. Vixen Windstorm (talk) 01:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

IT IS I

I get back from underway to discover my worlds are colliding. GNAH. Hi. -Nard 07:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Torgo

My edit comment was a little abbreviated. My point is more that there is a recommendation to merge in place so the notability flag is the wrong flag to use. The character is obviously notable enough for some level of inclusion in Wikipedia. Whether it merits its own article (which I believe it does) is another matter. Honestly, as an inclusionist, seeing the article is four years old, I think most of the burden of proof lies on the people who want to merge or excise the text. - BalthCat (talk) 19:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

How is the merger not completely relevent to the notability tag? If it is not sufficiently notable, do you actually think that arbitrary removal will take place? Or that an AfD will not result in a Merge? - BalthCat (talk) 20:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

It's pretty simple really. There are no sources to establish any notability. The age of an article can't be used to circumvent one of Wikipedia's core policies. I think you may be confusing the tag with a speedy delete tag? The tag is placed there when an editor has concerns about a certain issue (in this case an obvious one), an issue that still hasn't been resolved. The merger request may be an effort to resolve it, but it doesn't stop that article having notability issues. If you want to remove it when address it first. Rehevkor ✉ 20:10, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not confused at all. The tag is simply *redundant*. - BalthCat (talk) 20:16, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

No it isn't. There're no sources to establish notability irregardless of the merger proposal. It's as simple as that really. Rehevkor ✉ 20:17, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Then nominate the article for deletion. If it isn't notable enough to merge, it should be deleted outright, or made a redirect. No? Otherwise, the merger tag is all we need to see. - BalthCat (talk) 20:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I suppose it's been tagged for notability for a while now.. and the merger has stalled. I'll nominate for deletion asap. Rehevkor ✉ 20:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Cute. Don't bother, I'm going to redirect and create a dab page anyway. This has been ridiculous. - BalthCat (talk) 20:40, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Huh? It was your suggestion. Rehevkor ✉ 21:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Woah Woah Woah

I have no connection with Pendulum. Would like to though... free festival tickets! But anyway I digress how on Earth can you claim my edits were a conflict of interest? People edit articles they read, why are they reading it? Because they have an interest in the subject. That goes against the idea of a wiki in general! It's like editing Lostpedia regrading Lost and saying that possibly you like Lost so don't edit. --   Dee4leeds  talk  contribs  all  15:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Well Others in the world disagree. My reviews are always popping up on articles added by people I don't know. So I argue that it is professional and that I do work in the Music business! --   Dee4leeds  talk  contribs  all  16:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I have read it, not only am I a DJ and work in music, I am also very professional. Something which many people agree with. More than say Robert Christgau in my opinion, who I believe has a habit of either being narrow minded or lacking, but of course that is only opinion. --   Dee4leeds  talk  contribs  all  16:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

But the conflict of interest page states to avoid or TAKE GREAT CAUTION! I didn't plaster it all over the page I was subtle and it doesn't effect the neutrality of the article. --   Dee4leeds  talk  contribs  all  17:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Possibly you may have to read the article again. At no point have I broken a rule of wikipedia, if anything you have: WP:GAME. --   Dee4leeds  talk  contribs  all  23:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me? Clear? You accused me of trying to turn the In Silico page into a advertising ground for The Three Rs. When I simply added my review to the reviews section. And I find it ironic that you linked me to Good Faith article when the problem is the lack of yours. --   Dee4leeds  talk  contribs  all  09:17, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Metallica

Hey mate; it seems that Twinkle cut off the link in my edit summary, so it makes no sense -- it was supposed to say "please see this ≈ The Haunted Angel 20:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

---

Aw you shoulda kept that link -- it was there as a statement about Metallica and their opposition to filesharing. They deserve it anyways...what can't they buy because of people downloading their new songs, a new personal jumbo jet?...all well I guess I'm surprised it lasted an hour hah :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.3.14 (talk) 15:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Series infobox

Are you sure its really necessary? Other than the fact it says "Myst series" as the article title, and its made clear that it is the franchise in the first couple of words in the intro, it just looks wrong to have the same word repeated twice. The bulk of users will be reading it on a computer where they can see the images, there's no way we can possibly cater to all possible ways of looking at an article (for instance, the amount of articles on Wikipedia that aren't optimised for proper presentation on high resolution widescreen is rather high). The way I see it is an application of common sense (not to imply your reasons don't use common sense either), use of the title field when the logo doesn't use the title, or when there isn't a logo definitely makes sense and is required (see Mortal Kombat and Terminator (franchise). Same is true when the logo consists of more than just the title (see Star Trek), it looks presentable. However, it just doesn't seem presentable in my eyes to repeat the same word when the logo is only the title. -- Sabre (talk) 00:08, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Death Magnetic production

Just to clarify, I'm well aware that this blog entry does not make for a reliable source on its own. Still, the radio source did pick up on the story, the person being interviewed also happening to be the blogger and since the earlier citation of the radio did not provide a recording of the show in question, I decided to keep the blog entry, in order to provide additional context for our readers. Of course, with the new citation, that's no longer necessary. I listened to the radio feature again and rephrased the section's first sentence according to what was said, distortion and clipping being mentioned explicitly and dynamic range compression being comprehensively described in laymen's terms. The would-be quote is gone and I hope that's a revision we can work with. – Cyrus XIII ^(talk) 10:00, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:Lost cast

I realized you were right. My apologizes. --HELLØ ŦHERE 21:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Michael Hogan

Sorry about the revert. I wasn't looking carefully and thought someone was waving the flag. I need my coffee, I guess. Drmargi (talk) 20:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Please don't bite the newcomers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.202.81.156 (talk) 05:54, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

iPod nano Endurance

Hi! Unlike some anonymous editors, I'm glad you're following protocol for contesting content. If you'd like to start a section of the article's talk page, I'd be glad to see what we can do to consolidate that information.--HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 03:20, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

SGU

Yes, actually. My mistake! Thanks for catching it. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 20:57, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mario Kart Source

— This is going to be a long three or so days... MuZemike 06:19, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

A Memory of Light

ok this is the third time I've tried to post a reaction to your editing. why are you changing facts? Is it ecause they dont' fit your world view? i can backup anything I have put on the sight by the comments the fans leave. no one has checked just deleted the posts then send threatening messages to me. what the heck? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.112.172.176 (talk) 15:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

"Any material lacking a reliable source may be removed, but editors might object if you remove material without giving them sufficient time to provide references, and it has always been good practice, and expected behavior of Wikipedia editors (in line with our editing policy), to make reasonable efforts to find sources oneself that support such material, and cite them."

Also if you look the comments oare on teh dragonmount site the fan reaction to the split. Do you work for TOR books? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.112.172.176 (talk) 15:24, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok so how would you cite 100 plus angry blog comments? the site is referenced allready on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.112.172.176 (talk) 15:26, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

97.112.172.176: Please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Neither blogs nor blog comments meet standards for uses as sources on WIkipedia. --Pleasantville (talk) 16:02, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

User:97.112.172.176 seems to have just registered an account as User:HellinaBucket in order to continue inserting the same information. --Pleasantville (talk) 16:37, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not citing the Blog, I'm citing the comments of the fans which ARE fact. Tor financial stability i can understand but the comments is the reaction of the fans. If this wasn't able to be taken into account movie pages and book pagews wouldn't have "critical Response" as seen on several movie and book reviews. Also there seems to be no problem citing dragomount.com on the page as it is, kind of contradictory isn't it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.112.174.15 (talk) 15:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your efforts in keeping the Memory of Light article clean. They are appreciated. Caidh (talk) 18:09, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Now now reread what you just sent me. if what you say is true no movie or artist page would have the section of Critical response. I am trying to say that this is not uni-popular decision by Tor books. Now another example would be things put on world leaders pages, do you think Hitler has a glowing review? NO, sad to say life isn't as peachy as you seem to be trying to enforce on others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HellinaBucket (talk • contribs) 17:07, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Coheed and Cambria Infobox

I've been informed that you are one of the keepers of Coheed and Cambria's wiki page. I just wanted to let you know that Deckiller, an admin here, has decided to start trouble again by insiting on editing the "emo" tag into the bands infobox. I know this issue had been resolved sometime last year where the "emo" tag was removed from the box and left for discussion in the "genre" area of the band's page. It was suggested to me that I let you know about this issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.219.34 (talk) 01:40, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Heron Marked Barnstar

The Heron Marked Barnstar I hereby award this Barnstar to Rehevkor for his conspicuous effort editing and improving articles related to The Wheel of Time, specifically A Memory of Light, and protecting them from unsourced and badly sourced craziness. Your dedication and attentiveness is deeply appreciated. Tai'shar Wikipedia! Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:58, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! I think you did a great job protecting the pages and showed alot of dedication, and deserved to be recognized. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:13, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Reasons.

Per his blog (reference 13 I believe) Brian Sanderson confirms that they wanted to do a trilogy with a subtitle of A memory of Light" The bookstores wouldn't allow as they thought it would be too confusing. They are no longer using A Memory of light in any of the books. Sorry it's just wrong. BTW I have no problems with you changing the grammer or wording but think that all of the story should be told. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HellinaBucket (talk • contribs) 18:22, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

As I said you did cover that in the bookstore part. however in sandersons blog it does say the memory of light was dropped due to bookstore insistence —Preceding unsigned comment added by HellinaBucket (talk • contribs) 18:35, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I understand tyhat why shouldn't the title be changed to the gathering storm with a subheading "A Memory of Light"? It would be more factual since as it stand there will be no AMOL it should be correct but still documented that was the original plan as you did with the split. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HellinaBucket (talk • contribs) 18:42, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Then perhaps there needs to be a mention to the fact that the Trilogy will not be subtitles A Memory of Light. The cut and paste quote is what I am referring to.HellinaBucket (talk) 21:29, 11 April 2009 (UTC)HellinaBucketHellinaBucket (talk) 21:29, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not communicating my meaning well i guess. I mean that the whole article for a memory of light should be only a subtitile under the gathering storm and the other three books. Its been changed so I thin kthat it should still be mentioned as the original plans but only a subheading —Preceding unsigned comment added by HellinaBucket (talk • contribs) 21:49, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Gathering Storm

About this, I'd say give it a while yet. All the news is still basically just his blog, and all the previous news in all the other sources was A Memory of Light. Plus, I recall him saying (I forget if on the blog or a message board) that the naming of the final trilogy may be something like "A Memory of Light: The Gathering Storm", with probably a lot of the WoT logo and "ROBERT JORDAN" splashed all over. I'd bet that in 3-4 months we'll be swimming in Gathering Storm news. rootology (C)(T) 04:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Rehevkor. You have new messages at Hell in a Bucket's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I reverted your edit in hopes that it would send you a message that you had one. I see it didn't apologies. I did make a minor change on the page that it is possible that the last book only will have the title A Memory of Light. I sourced the sentence I changed but I am trying to show both povs in a nuetral manner. Let me know what you think.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:07, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the template explains it very well. A lot of the info can change as time goes on. Please feel free if we have updated sources to confirm either viewpoint you are welcome to remove and revert as I understand information can and will change over time.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:07, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Wheel of Time Task Force

Hey, I'm trying to drum up support to create a Wheel of Time Task Force under Wikiproject Novels. Given the high level of interest that currently exists in the Wheel of Time pages, I think now is a good time to create such a project to help focus all this energy and keep the participation level high. Would you be interested in joining such a project? Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:45, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that

I moved your posts together because I have seen cases where someone deliberately inserted a post to change the context of someone else's, and thought that if you were doing that too, it would be best to just move it to a neutral place and let you move it where it should go, if you cared to. But no, I don't think you did that on purpose. I see all posts are now in their right places, and the indenting was never a problem. I'm willing to have both our posts about positioning removed from the talk page. You can do it if you like (or I can do it if you prefer); mention in the edit summary we agreed to this on your talk page, and it should be okay. Peace! --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 20:51, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Your vote for POTY 2008

Hello Rehevkor, Thank you for your vote on POTY 2008 here. Because you did not log in to Commons before you voted your signature is shown as IP address, and your vote might get removed. According to this you do have account on Commons. May I please ask you to log in to your Commons account and vote one more time? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Half-Life 2: Episode Three

It's kind of a moot point now that the article has been redirected, but you said that there was nothing to support a release for Xbox and PS3 for Episode Three. I would have thought that the fact that the previous games were released would be support enough. Valve isn't exactly stupid enough to cut out a lot of sales like that. They may be released later, but I'd bet Wikipedia that they will be released. Edit: Moron is I who forgot to log in. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 10:12, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

So? I've not seen one reliable source that confirms God exists. You'd be making assumptions, assumptions have no place on Wikipedia. Bit of a faulty analogy, but I can't think of anything better right now. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 13:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

That helps but wasn't what i mean.t

I have to admit you have done a decent job on revising The article on Memory Of Light. I did have a question for you sicne you seem to know the wikipedia process well. I am attempting to help edit an article on the TV show Operation Repo. I'm not having an editing war buit the article doesn't meet the quality standards for citiations. how do you do the coding that sends the messages you were sending to me? The quality of standrds one. I know i'm not your favorite person but your help would be appreciated.HellinaBucket (talk) 15:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)HellinaBucketHellinaBucket (talk) 15:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess I should specify better, I mean like when you sent me the section that blogs aren't reliable sources. like i said i'm not actually having an isuue with a person just want to send in correct format why i removed what i did. (No Citation) I appreciate the help. never mind duh....scroll down.....thank youHellinaBucket (talk) 17:01, 29 April 2009 (UTC)HellinaBucketHellinaBucket (talk) 17:01, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes this does help quite a bit. Again thank you for your help, you've done well on the page AMoL HellinaBucket (talk) 20:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)HellinaBucketHellinaBucket (talk) 20:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess I'm not totally done. Can you look at the Operation Repo page and tell me if I'm out of line. It's a very small page but teh things they are saying in there are completely without sources. I do know if I am wrong you will tell me though so it would be cool to get a seperate opinion. Thanks sorry to bug again/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by HellinaBucket (talk • contribs) 15:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

As much as it pains me to admit it your opinion is valiued and informed, thats why i asked.HellinaBucket (talk) 16:06, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Portal Talk Page Deletion

I deleted some talk page discussion that wasn't really relevant to the article a while back and was quickly reverted. So who's right? You or... someone else. I can't remember their username. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 15:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Created my first article.

Hello my old nemisis. I created my first article today wanted to stop by see if you could take a look tell me what you think. Central High School (Pueblo, Colorado)HellinaBucket (talk) 20:14, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I made a new page.

Hey there, I made a new page and wanted to get your opinion on it. its Central High School (Pueblo, Colorado). I had a little help but most of the wowrk is mine. Let me know how I can improve it. ThanksHellinaBucket (talk) 01:12, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Um, Welcome to the Wikipedia...

Don't know if you counted my number of edits here and in Wikimedia (which honestly means squat, but someone ran that by me once ;)) -although I've been editing continuously for the past 3 years. Coheed and Cambria. What was the sorry mistake I made?? I apologize if I offended someone's sensibilities by making a well-intentioned error. Lately I've gotten fed up with the lack of photos on pages, and have been working with images and sound on the pages. Sometimes I see omissions or such glaring need, as with copyediting, that I allow myself to be sidetracked... something I had hoped to put behind me a looong time ago. I'm sorry if the tone of this is (heck, I don't know) snotty? But so few people drop thanks on talk pages, compared with those with complaints. Currently I'm adding photos to Frank Zappa to ensure it's FA status, Cat Stevens who is stalled at GA in part because of his return to music, and other places. I know little of Coheed and Cambria, perhaps I should've skated past? Tell me here, please.--leahtwosaints (talk) 23:21, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Star Trek 11 (Movie)

And.... your reason for removing a cited piece of factual information is?? An clear explanation is requested, Thanks Alexlamf (talk) 02:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Modern Material Handling is actually a trade magazine and the author of the "blog article" is a columnist there on material handling (fork-lifts). Still not valid? http://www.mmh.com/info/CA6297013.html

The wikipedia reliable sources explanation is at best broad here, quote "Proper sourcing always depends on context; common sense and editorial judgment are an indispensable part of the process" (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources). IMHO this is proper sourcing, considering Tom Andel can be considered a reliable publisher (http://www.mmh.com/blogger/2837.html) by his credentials. It satisfies author credibility (his credentials) and publishing credibility since its a trade magazine.

My intention of adding the line, was to add a support fact, that the item was used in the movie. As a support to the general idea the paragraph was trying to convey in "Design".

Oh well, can't really find a full news article for this, just a german half-article... Guess I'll have to wait till someone publishes a closeup photo of it (the german site has a barely visible photo of a forklift in the background). http://www.treknews.de/treknews/newspro-treknews/static/12267620815510.php

Your thoughts?

Alexlamf (talk) 04:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Coheed and Cambria edit

It's my pleasure (and duty) to edit. :) Fdssdf (talk) 06:08, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Vol12gatheringstorm.JPG)

Thanks for uploading File:Vol12gatheringstorm.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:52, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Pyst

hello;

i note your sudden interest in this article. you do not seem to have edited it previously in the entire time since the page was created, so i'm assuming that you are a friend on EEMIV, & he's "called you in"

parroty entertainment is defunct, the title is no longer published & has not been for years.

the fact that the title is unavailable as a new game is most certainly relevant to the article.

since you don't like the references i used, or the wording, please feel free to suggest alternative ways of phrasing & sourcing the information :)

Lx 121 (talk) 19:21, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

imdb

please link me to the the WP that regards IMDD as "not a reliable source"?

Lx 121 (talk) 03:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:RS. There isn't a "WP" for every source. Something about their policies of accepting user submitted data is a primary reason, as well as simply being proven to be unreliable. I suggest you ask there is you have any further questions. Questions like this are also best asked on articles talk pages. Rehevkor ✉ 04:05, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5