User talk:Ryulong/Archive 35

Archive 30

←

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

→

Archive 40

Re:Number of episodes

Its been 7 days and there been reply at WT:TOKU. So i think we should go by WikiProject Televisions decision. Powergate92Talk 23:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

What decision? There was none. They just said "we usually do this" and there is no deadline.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

It was agree that "It's really a matter of preference by the primary editors of the article. If they want to update weekly, there is no rule that says they cannot." There is no deadline but there's been no reply at WT:TOKU in 7 days and its been agree at WikiProject Televisions what to do. Powergate92Talk 23:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

There was no agreement anywhere. Wait a bit longer. It's not urgent.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:57, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Darker than Black

Saw you removed the character "Kana" from Darker than Black. If you would like, I can cite the manga itself; she is definitely a character (and the main one of the manga). I would question the translations though, since the DtB manga has not yet been imported to the U.S. Should I revert and cite, or would you like to? ɳOCTURNEɳOIR _{talk // contribs} 23:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I can't find her information at the Japanese Wikipedia article. If you can find the kanji of her name and cite it to the manga, you can put everything back in. Honestly, does she really belong in that section?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:18, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

The main character of the manga? I would believe her inclusion in that section is necessary (as well as in the character list). I've readded her, sourcing the manga. I can't read or write Japanese, but an online translator and this tells me that the kanji I added is her first name. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR _{talk // contribs} 00:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

That's not "Kana". It's a word meaning "elimination" or "purge". I'm trying to find something about this character but she does not exist.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:07, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that out, as you can tell, I clearly don't read or write Japanese. Sorry about the trouble! ɳOCTURNEɳOIR _{talk // contribs} 03:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi!

I am not that familiar with categorization of albums but from what I have seen people categorize them by genre, date of release, etc. Look at albums by the same artist or similar ones and see how they are categorized. Maybe this album will fit there? Postcard Cathy (talk) 00:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... There are no more articles on his albums.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:10, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Episode numbers

The new idea of "see Episodes" does not solve the problem. It will not make the current number explicit. Only with actually mentioning the number will the readers know the number speedily. I believe you're just trying to reduce the workload on editors. If 2 editors want to update weekly, let them update weekly, please. —Mythdon (talk) 00:50, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

It provides the same output, as the number is in that section very clearly and it solves the problem of having to remember that the number is already up one for the next broadcast. I would still like more than two against one in this consensus.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:58, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

You have yet to gain support for your idea of "don't update weekly". Pucca (TV series), Family Guy and Back at the Barnyard are examples of television series articles that I can show you that have their episode number shown and still airing at the same time. Look at those pages, and tell me what you think. —Mythdon (talk) 01:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

That's what every other project does and they don't have an abbreviated list of episodes in the article, as well. The case of these pages is different.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

But their lists of episodes are larger. It doesn't matter if the list is on the same article or not, it is the same case. —Mythdon (talk) 01:50, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

That would mean on these articles the number would be in two places. The final number, if there is one, is what the entry is for. All of these shows are self-contained one year productions and it would be a hell of a lot better if we show a link to the list on the article, and especially because there is no easy way to label the date. This is not a pressing issue. Just leave it be and wait. No one is going to be wondering WHY ISN'T THERE A NUMBER HERE. Guidelines are guidelines, not rules. And you and Powergate are the only two who seem to give a shit about this.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:56, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I and Powergate92 are the two who have actually come into an agreement on what to do. You have not, as far as I know. If the linked articles above can update their number, why shouldn't the Power Rangers articles? Do you really think that updating weekly is unnecessary or do you just not want to put extra workload on editors? Regardless of workload, I think it is necessary, given that readers will have less time consumption to know the number. I understand that you disagree with what I am saying, but please let editors update every week, okay? —Mythdon (talk) 02:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

So your the only one that thinks the numbers should not be in the infobox! Me, Mythdon, Collectonian and Bignole think the numbers should be in the infobox so that's 1 vs 4! Powergate92Talk 02:13, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Collectonian and Bignole don't care. They're just going off of what they're used to. You two are the only ones who care.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:21, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

The number needs to be updated every week. Your idea is not supported by any editor. The only agreement is that the number should be updated, as agreed by I and Powergate92. Please leave the page alone. I am undoing your change(s). —Mythdon (talk) 02:34, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

You cannot tell me where I can and cannot edit. I still disagree with the choice of updating this number weekly in two separate locations when one will suffice.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I meant as in leave the page alone regarding the dispute. My wording was just unclear. Two editors say update weekly, but only one says "no". I and Powergate92 may not be a strong consensus, but it is still a consensus. I am not trying to use voting against you, but still, please leave the parameter alone. I and Powergate92 are the only agreement as of now. Until there is a consensus against us two, you are not going to get your way. —Mythdon (talk) 02:58, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

2 against 1 is not a consensus at all, but if you feel the need to update this thing twice, then do so. Weekly is unnecessary. Monthly is at least how it's done elsewhere.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Ranger colors

If Jungle Fury can have a black and green ranger mark in their slots for Bat and Elephant Rangers, then SPD can have a mark for Black and white due to Shadow and Omega, and shouldn't Triassic Ranger be the Other Ranger form Dino Thunder? 98.21.202.92 (talk) 04:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

But they shouldn't.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Decade/Diend capitalization

I edited the capitalization for "DecaDriver" and "DienDriver" for consistency with other compound words used on the show, such as "KamenRide" and "AttackRide". 79.136.75.48 (talk) 22:14, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Those are different. The things say "KAMENRIDE" and "ATTACKRIDE" which are two different words in English. "DECADRIVER" and "DIENDRIVER" are compound words.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:24, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Ryulong arbitration

This is to notify you that a new workflow management method is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Ryulong/Workshop. You are being notified because you are an involved party in the Ryulong arbitration case.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, KnightLago (talk) 16:04, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Dark Kabuto.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Dark Kabuto.JPG. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 20:48, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Fixed --Numyht (talk) 16:53, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Do me a favor

KamenRiderDecade.jpg isn't reverting right. Maybe a admin like you can do something about it. --Numyht (talk) 16:56, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I've fixed it. All you have to do is refresh the page. I'll be deleting a lot of the other images uploaded and reverted to.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Ncmvocalist/Ryulong-PD

Per the new ArbCom format, it has been requested that we move workshop discussions to userspace. As such, your input is welcome here: User:Ncmvocalist/Ryulong-PD. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 21:08, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Power Rangers

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,514255,00.html Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh no. An extra is convicted of murder.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:43, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

"Too complex"

How is my company differing table "too complex"? —Mythdon t/c 07:05, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

It just is.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

If there's no reason why, then I might as well change it back to my version. —Mythdon t/c 07:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

How can you say how complex something is? It is just much more complex than the version that I've put in the article currently.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:27, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I happen to not see sufficient explanation as to why you say it is "complex". Why not put my company differences in your version of the table? That way, complexity is not as present. —Mythdon t/c 07:31, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

It is A) not necessary, and B) explained in text higher up in the article. The complexity arises from the formatting of the table itself, which is also why I've removed the "season" boxes for the MMPR portion. This is as simple as the table can get.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:32, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Is that why this wasn't done a long time ago? —Mythdon t/c 15:45, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I think Mythdon version is better. Also i think this discussion should be moved to Talk:Power Rangers or WT:WikiProject Tokusatsu. Powergate92Talk 18:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Do you ever have an opinion of your own? I was removing the complex formatting of the table because with all of Mythdon's additions, and the addition of the season boxes in the MMPR box made it even more complex. This is as simple as the table gets and it is before I made any serious changes to it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:55, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'll find a less complex version of the company grouping. —Mythdon t/c 19:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you can finally turn that section into something with a bulletted list instead of a tabular format.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:20, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

As the last change to the table was agreed on in a discussion at Talk:Power Rangers. The new changes to the table should also be agreed on in a discussion at Talk:Power Rangers or WT:WikiProject Tokusatsu. So i am going to revert the new changes to the table and it should not be change again until the new changes have been agreed on. Powergate92Talk 19:21, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Whatever changes to the table had been reverted already to a version prior to Mythdon's edits and the changes discussed at that section.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

The January discussion of the table had absolutely no formation of any consensus whatsoever and only consisted of contradicting viewpoints in which no compromise was ever sufficient. A third party could not solve the issue, which is why the table is still controversial to this day. —Mythdon t/c 19:34, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Tommy Oliver

Wasn't Tommy Oliver last known as a Black Ranger? If so, he should be colored as "black". "Red" is from more than a decade ago in the Zeo and Turbo days. I know he was the leader during his time as the Red Zeo Ranger and Red Turbo Ranger, but despite being leader during that time, I cannot see how that is a reason for him to be colored as "red". As far as I'm concerned, those colors are suppose to cover their current/latest colors. In this case, Tommy was last seen as the Black Dino Ranger, which is why I think his article should be colored as "black" in the infobox. Signification of leadership is not a reason for the color to be "red" in my opinion. I understand that Bridge Carson is a different story. Oh, and as for "ignoring the text", I did not ignore the hidden comment. My removal of it is indication that I didn't in fact do so. I'm not going to waste my time edit warring on this, so lets discuss this in hopes we'll come to an agreement. —Mythdon t/c 19:04, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Tommy was the Green Power Ranger, White Power Rangers, Red Zeo Ranger, Red Turbo Ranger, and Black Dino Ranger. Seeing as he was the Red Ranger the longest, that should dictate what color the infobox should be. I wasn't the one who designed the infobox. However, I would think that seeing most of these articles are on major characters who appeared as possibly multiple colors, they should be identified with the color they are most identifiable with. In fact, that could very well be green or white for his article. If you really want to do something indepth about it, add something to the template such that it shows multiple colors in multiple areas (I believe Template:Kamen Rider character was made in such a way, unless it's been deleted). That way, there can be something colored to show that he was the Green, White, Red, Red, and Black Rangers, and we can incorporate it into articles on other Rangers who have had color designations that have changed over time.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

There was some template that was used in some fashion.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I've found the old template and requested the content so you may modify it into something new for the Power Rangers pages. Also, take a look at how Jason Lee Scott is treated, particularly considering he was the Gold Ranger.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:21, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, go ahead and use the old templates if you want. I only ask that the pages not be recreated, or if they have to be they get deleted once the code is copied. I assume an admin can pull the code from the deleted histories, not certain really. But go ahead and do what you need to do to get the code.

FYI- I based it on Template:Infobox animanga if you want something else to get ideas from. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 19:49, 13 April 2009 (UTC))

Next steps at RFAR

The RFAR has moved to the point of asking for the parties' statements on evidence at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Ryulong/Workshop#Statements_by_Parties, your attention to it would be appreciated. MBisanz ^talk 20:55, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Secretive Anonymous

• Secretive Anonymous (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

You blocked this account awhile ago as being a vandalism only account. Could you please take away the user's ability to edit their talk page, as he or she is using it to tell others to vandalize a specific user page. Could you perhaps also delete it?— Dædαlus ^Contribs 23:04, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Done.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:22, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 08:38, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

"Grammar fix"

I don't how your version of the grammar is better than my version of the grammar. I would like you to explain why you think my version of the grammar is in error. Thanks! —Mythdon t/c 06:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

What you had was not a proper sentence.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I think it was a good sentence, although I also feel your "better fix" is good too. Right now I am wondering if there are any better options. —Mythdon t/c 06:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

What matters is that it is proper English.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

While I appreciate your attempts to fix part of my recent copyedit, I have modified part of your "fix" so that it is still understandable. Okay? —Mythdon t/c 04:16, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

kabuto

In the context of the Shinkenger show, the Kabuto Origami is a Japanese Rhinocerous Beetle mecha, aka Kabuto-mushi. The Helmet of samurai legend is named after this bug. The title is therefore "Beetle Origami" not "Helmet Origami. (I have also cited this information when I made changes, that a Kabuto is beetle) After all, why would that origami be named after a piece of head gear when every other Origami is based on a living creature? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.105.129 (talk) 05:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

"Kabuto" is Japanese for "Helmet", not "Beetle".—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:49, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

That was one reason why I suggested to keep Kabuto in the episode title. Too many people familaize "Kabuto" with beetle regardless of translation. Fractyl (talk) 03:05, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

No. It means "helmet" and "Kabuto" is not the animal.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

You and I know that, but NOT most people. Though the word is translatable, it's clear that this will happen again(someone changing 'helmet' to 'beetle') and thus a good reason to just stick with "Kabuto Origami" as the episode title. Fractyl (talk) 13:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

It's clear from the Japanese name.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Why did you remove the category Southern Baptists?

I was adding someone to this category and noticed you are the one who deleted it. You claim it is an unneccesary category. However, with the major breaks between Southern Baptists and American Bpatists, to the point where they compete for members in the same area it seems a bit much to claim that we can use one label for all baptists. While it is true than many people think of Bpatists primarily in terms of the Southern Bpatists Convention, this is only one of several baptists groups, and I think it is districtive enough to justify being categorized seperately.Johnpacklambert (talk) 21:21, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

When the category was created there was only one person in the category. I don't know anything about the American Protestant groups, so if you need to, you can create the category. Please use Category:Southern Baptist Convention when categorizing individuals who are Southern Baptist.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:50, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Mirror Monsters

I just read your response on the talk page for the Kamen Rider: Dragon Knight's characters page. I was wondering what you meant by that? The official website named the Advent Beasts though. Rtkat3 (talk) 6:30, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

If the American production does not name them after the Japanese monster names, then we should also not name them after the Japanese monster names.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:57, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Sisi?

I noticed your recent edit in the Shinkenger episodes page. Is "Sisi" something that's mentioned in the official Shinkenger website I assume? --Burai (talk) 15:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Why yes it is.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:39, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay then... it's just that I really despise the look of Kunrei-shiki romanisation. Makes Japanese romaji look ugly to be honest. --Burai (talk) 20:16, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

They use "Shinken" and "Sisi" on the same page. And you still pronounce it as "shishi". I think that's reason enough.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)