User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 33

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

→

Archive 40

IP issue

Hi. Can you please take a look at the following: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. According to the histories I provided, the IPs appear to be a dynamic hopper which geolocates to the University of South Florida. I believe that it appears to have issues with WP:NPOV, WP:INUNIVERSE, WP:N and WP:OR. I think we should file an WP:SPI if its necessary, but do you have any thoughts about this matter? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:28, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sjones! I've looked it over. I definitely agree with your actions thus far. I don't know if SPI would help much, since a number of them haven't been very active recently. I can protect any pages being targeted though. I protected Xion, and it looks like someone already protected Eureka. Were there any others? Sergecross73 msg me 20:16, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Not at the moment, but can you take a look at the contributions of Liftboard Rider (talk · contribs)? It appears that the user, whom I believe is an obvious fan of Eureka Seven and the Kingdom Hearts series, intends to recreate articles that were merged using those IPs months earlier in different name spaces. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 10:23, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Well, I believe he's allowed to have copies in the draft/sandbox space, if he think he's able to work on it and make it meet the GNG. I, like you, don't really expect it to go that way, but he can technically do it though. If he starts moving it into the article space without a consensus in his favor, then I could always up the protection of any possible names, but I'd have to wait until he does that first though. I can also speedy delete the drafts once they've been sitting there without improvement for a while... Sergecross73 msg me 14:01, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	You deserve this. Thanks for giving me this advice Bsliangel (talk) 16:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Let me know if you have any questions or need help. (Also, a reminder, your rough draft was moved to Draft:Fantasy Forest: Land Before Dragons.) Sergecross73 msg me 16:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimono111 (talk • contribs) 16:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Thanks for the message. This is my gift for you Bsliangel (talk) 16:52, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Fantasy Forest

Thank you for helping on the article fantasy forest. If you could, please help on improving it. And I was also wondering how to submit the draft.

Bsliangel (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)BsliangelBsliangel (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Submit

How do I submit my article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsliangel (talk • contribs) 17:33, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I've added the articles for creation tag back on to your draft. If you click on the spot that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!", it should be submitted for review. FYI, I would not submit yet if I were you, as I don't think it would pass a review. I'm saying this to help you out - not to criticize - but there are a number of issues with it currently.

1. There's many formatting issues - for example, your headings/section titles "Habitats" are in boxes because you put a ton of spaces in front of them in efforts to "center" them. That's not how Wikipedia formatting works.
2. You need to use reliable sources, and directly cite the information (see WP:REFB). Websites like Wikias and Gamefaqs are not usable sources because the info there can be submitted/written by anyone. You need to use sources that are written by actual writers/journalists. Like that example I gave you a while back - http://www.148apps.com/reviews/fantasy-forest-story-review/
3. You need to show how the article meets Wikipedia's standards for having its own article. It shouldn't just be all a guide informing people how to play.

For an example of how an iPhone game article should look more like, see an article I made - Sonic Jump. It's not the best article in the world, but it meets the bare minimums. Sergecross73 msg me 17:41, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Draft: Fantasy Forest: Land Before Dragons

Do you think you could keep helping me on this? Link — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimono111 (talk • contribs) 15:11, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I can try to help some more...but as I was saying above, its kinda going to need a lot of work to get it to pass. See my points 1, 2 and 3 in the section above this one, here on my talk page, for starters... Sergecross73 msg me 15:29, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I drove by the article and did a tiny bit of cleanup. I also added two sources to the talk page, you should attempt to integrate the information they present and reference them. Remember to not copy them verbatim! That would be a copyright violation. Unfortunately didn't find any usable reliable sources when I looked... -- ferret (talk) 15:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

ferret - The 148 apps review is usable. The Touch Arcade one is too, though its rather brief and a database entry, so it wouldn't count towards notability. It could help with some details of a gameplay overview type sentence maybe... Sergecross73 msg me 15:48, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Serge, note that there's apparently two games, "Fantasy Forest Story" and "Fantasy Forest: Land Before Dragons". The 148apps review appears to be for the former, I could find no review for "Land Before Dragons". Touch Arcade specifically notes "No Review" for "Land Before Dragons". -- ferret (talk) 15:50, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Or do they use it interchangably? There seems to be separate app listings for both... -- ferret (talk) 15:52, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I had thought that one was just a shortened name for another. When I'm in the app store, I search for both, and I only come up with one hit with both terms, and its the same one. I don't get a second listing either either search term. That's all I had been basing it off of though, I've never played the game before, nor is it really my type of game, so I'm not entirely sure...but these new editors were asking for help at WP:VG so I was trying to give a bit of guidance... Sergecross73 msg me 15:57, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah guess so. I just feel like I saw someone recently refer to them as distinct titles. Not a lot of sources here but found one more that might help with gameplay. -- ferret (talk) 16:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, its going to be really close as to if it's going to meet the WP:GNG or not here. Not entirely sure how strict or lax AFC is either. I've personally never used it as a creator or a reviewer. (I didn't start creating articles until I had been here a few years, and knew pretty well what an article should look like... Sergecross73 msg me 16:08, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Brogue (video game) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brogue (video game) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brogue (video game) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --Anarchyte 00:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

My biggest contribution was just declining its speedy deletion tag months back, but thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 00:34, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Meghan Trainor

Hi Sergecross, if you get a chance, could you take a look at edits I recently made to the Meghan Trainor "early life” section? These were edits originally added by Lips Are Movin, which I trimmed and copy edited. I took the time to do so because her recent efforts were mass reverted [7],[8],[9] and I’m concerned multiple editors are being run off the Meghan Trainor suite of articles due to the ongoing battleground and being accused of “fancruft” (But who else but a fan is going to bother reading all the sources involved in writing a good comprehensive early life section?) I seem to recall you had a moderate position on that article in regards to the past concerns regarding length and bloat, acknowledging bloat, but also thinking there was music snobbery at play. If you get a chance, would you mind taking a look and seeing if you think this needs further trimmed? [10]--BoboMeowCat (talk) 23:06, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I am not a fan or anything, I just stumbled upon one if the discussions at random, so I could help make a call on fancruff type info. I'm a bit busy at the moment, but I'll look into it in a bit. Sergecross73 msg me 01:24, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Dragonron

That indefintetly-blocked user Dragonron is back again, this time as Looks nice guy! I'm back (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Hoo! rock me back! (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Just wanted to inform you about this in advance. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 07:19, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Blocked them, and a few others, and protected the page. Even if its not DR, it's still obviously someone making new accounts to continue an edit war. Let me know if it this recurs, and I can look into it again. Sergecross73 msg me 11:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for dealing with this matter. I repoted Dragonron at META[11]. @Sjones23:Could you start the sockpuppet investigation on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dragonron? --Infinite0694 (Talk) 14:40, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

No problem. Do you suspect for there to be more socksout there? If not, we don't really need to do an SPI if I already indef blocked every one that edited at that article they were vandalizing. You guys can do whatever you want though, just my 2 cents. Sergecross73 msg me 14:47, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Semicolons

Hi there. I noticed you replaced a header with a semicolon in this edit. This generates broken HTML and causes some browsers, such as screen readers for the blind, to have trouble. Semicolons should only be use for definition lists, not for pseudo-headers. It's not a huge deal, but I've been trying to get rid of all the errant semicolons on Wikipedia lately, and it's a pretty huge task. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:12, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

NinjaRobotPirate Oh, this comes as a surprise to me, as the semi-colon approach is pretty widely used as a method of sectioning off credits in band or album articles. (See WP:GA's like Green Day or Neighborhoods (Blink-182 album).) You may want to consult with some of these Wikiprojects, like music related ones, and their MOS, before spending too much time on this. Otherwise, its going to increase faster than you can try to fix it... Also, do you maybe have any alternative suggestions? Similar to your efforts, I commonly go about trimming out unnecessary sub sections that have little to no content to warrant sectioning off, which also clutter up the TOC at the tops of articles too. Sergecross73 msg me 16:28, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I didn't care at first, but then I saw it increasingly used all over the place. I just fix them when I see them; otherwise, it would be a pointlessly huge task. I don't want to go on a Giraffedata-style crusade. At first, I replaced semicolons with bolded text, thinking it was the lesser of two evils. I ran into trouble when MOS enthusiasts pointed out that it was against MOS:ACCESS. Being something of a fellow MOS enthusiast, I gave up on that. Since then, I haven't really had a good solution, but the TOC can always be limited if it gets unwieldy. Sometimes it's possible to strip out the headers completely, and other times it's easier to reword the subsection so that it doesn't need a header. Sometimes you can simply remove the errant semicolon, and it works as an introductory sentence for the following text. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:45, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

List of PlayStation Vita games

On this page, we're nearing the template transclusion limits apparently, and this will definitely be a problem once it happens. We've already had to remove navigational templates which are normally placed at the bottom of such articles, for instance {{Video game lists by platform}} and {{PlayStation}}.

Would it be a good idea to replace all instances of {{dts|date}} with plaintext dates (i.e. replacing {{dts|2015|02|25}} with "February 25, 2015") to alleviate this issue? The majority of transclusions on this page are automatic date format conversions, and although such a change would make future editing/updates to the page slightly more tedious (and the raw wikicode more messy), we can have the page functioning normally. This can be easily done with an automated script, by the way. --benlisquare_T•C•E 04:21, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Benlisquare - I see no problem with that. I know another approach I've seen would be to split the list into 2 articles as well - something like "List of PlayStation Vita games (A-M) and List of PlayStation Vita games (N-Z) (or wherever a split would make the most sense.) Either way, its up to you. Usually, it seems like these sorts of lists are usually just maintained by an editor or two, and aren't the type to be brought to "Good" or "Featured" status, so, with little opposition out there, you're probably free to take some liberties on the approach. Sergecross73 msg me 13:24, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

SCE Japan Studio page protection

An anonymous user keeps re-adding his (badly written and formatted) version on the SCE Japan Studio article. It doesn't seem neutral and it has TM symbols for every game, so since I've reverted him around 3 times, I'm proposing that the article be protected for a bit, if possible, thanks. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:29, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Done. Do what you can to discuss though. Sergecross73 msg me 23:58, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

I'll try next time, but I don't think the user will respond. The edits he keeps reverting too look like a copypasted pamphlet about the company or something. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:36, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

I completely understand, I just mean, if there's proof somewhere that you at least tried to start a discussion, then that usually alleviates you if any blame or trouble in edit warring/content disputes. Sergecross73 msg me 22:32, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Problematic editor on Sega related articles continues to ignore issues on the talk page

I'm sure you remember Tripple-ddd, the editor that has had multiple people reverting his mass changes on Sega related articles. Well, recently he states that since he "Hasn't got a response on the talk page...", that somehow gives him the right to continue to ignore what he's been told to stop doing. If you just take a gander at the Sega article talk page, you will see the massive walls of texts dating back months in which we try to help he see what he continues to do wrong, so he's wrong when he says this and is just edit warring at this point. We're all getting tired of babysitting him and reverting his edits that clearly go against consensus set on that talk page, so I'm wondering if something else can be done? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:15, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I'm very tired of dealing with him as well. You're like the third person to complain, and all of them have been warranted. Blocked for a week. Sergecross73 msg me 00:34, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Xbox360

Question, I'm an old WP user, as you can tell by my account, but you were proposing deleting the section showing that the xbox one game console was using deceptive tactics to market their game device, why? I mean I feel that is a major important milestone, if nothing else it would be like mentioning Microsoft without mentioning the misteps of Windows ME.Cleave and Smite, Delete and Tear! (talk) 03:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Because no reliable sources cover it in any of the ways people are trying to use it in the article, and no one has given a counter-proposal that didnt sound like they had an axe to grind against Microsoft. Sergecross73 msg me 03:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Strictly for the record, why is Gawker media considered reliable, when they are being sued in the the United States for behavior that was slanderous, Cleave and Smite, Delete and Tear! (talk) 04:24, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Please see WP:VG/S for the complete list of sources that are currently deemed usable or non-usable. Gawker Media isn't listed there as always being reliable - that's not the current stance. Kotaku specifically is usable, but even then, there's the "you need to be cautious when using it" type clauses with it. Sergecross73 msg me 12:23, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

I've just baked a batch of brownies (OK, Sainsbury's did; I just bought them! =D) and thought of you; hope you enjoy them, they're nut free. Kandiwell 22:25, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Haha, thank you Kandiwell. Sergecross73 msg me 14:16, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Possible conflict of interest

I was checking the new pages for video games and I noticed that two articles, Tom Kudirka and 2015, Inc., were made by User:Tomkudirka, which has me thinking there's a COI on these articles. Thoughts? GamerPro64 21:26, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Going by File:Tom_wiki.png, he claims to be the photo's copyright holder and then states the photo's "author" as Tom Kudirka. Questionable.. Яehevkor ✉ 21:49, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Seems like a COI, definitely. The article definitely has some "puffery" going on too. ("some of the most talented developers") Also, a lot of parts are unsourced. Sergecross73 msg me 22:06, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

So should I take this to AfD or nominate it for Speedy deletion as advertisement? GamerPro64 22:35, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

You can always try a speedy, and if it fails, send it to AFD. Sergecross73 msg me 22:56, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

GamerPro64 - So, it looks like both speedies failed. Looking through the sources a little closer, there does seem to at least be an attempt to claim he's notable, so I suppose that makes sense. Its up to you if you want to nominate them for AFD. I don't think they'd survive, honestly, but I'm also content personally with just hacking up the article to remove all the promotional content too. Your call. Sergecross73 msg me 14:19, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

On closer inspection, 2015, inc. wasn't made by the user. That was an error in my part so I undid my speedy tag. I think User:Hakken, the creator of the article, could improve on it for the better. like taking out the MobyGames citations and replace them with reliable source. I might pursue an AfD on the individual, though. GamerPro64 15:00, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

I'd advocate a redirect of the individual to the company too, if you think the company is notable enough to maintain having its own article. The only reason I didn't do it sooner was that I kind of thought they'd both be deleted. I admit I haven't looked into "2015 Inc." much though. Sergecross73 msg me 15:05, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Rise

Are you the paige owner of rise — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wonderdisk 93 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Are you talking about Rise Against? Wikipedia doesn't have page "page owners", but I do mediate conflicts there, yes. Sergecross73 msg me 23:36, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Untitled thread

Do not delete my page if you find an error, correct it. If you want to know more about me Google my name.

Tom Kudirka — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomkudirka (talk • contribs) 03:58, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) FYI, a quick Googling says that he is talking about SiN: Wages of Sin, developped by his studio 2015, Inc., and which you recently redirected to SiN after years of being unreferenced. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 04:05, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Salvidrim! - Yeah, GamerPro64 brought him to my attention after he noticed he appeared to be writing an article about himself. We've been discussing how to handle it a few sections up, here. The speedy deletes were declined, so I've been working on trimming all the unsourced or promotional content away. And yeah, I redirected the Wages of SiN because it had been tagged as unsourced for 8 years. Sergecross73 msg me 12:49, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Sin: Wages of Sin

Why did you delete the page Sin: Wages of Sin? You have it redirected to the SiN page. Wages of Sin is the mission pack for the game SiN. They are not the same game. What gives you the right to delete a cult classic? You can still buy this game on EBay. Did you research the game at all? The guys who made Sin: Wages of Sin worked for 2015, Inc. their next game was Medal of Honor: Allied Assault. The team left and became Infinity Ward. Have you heard of them? Their next game was Call of Duty. Put back up the page Sin: Wages of Sin. Clearly you never heard of that game. But anyone who truly knows video games understands its significance to FPS games. Underdoger (talk) 17:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Have you done any research on how encyclopedia articles are supposed to be written? That article was without a single reference in 8 years. I am well within my right to redirect an article that has zero reliable sources in it. That was a terribly written article. Articles need to be written by what reliable sources say. If you're so deadset on it having an article, then go dig up some sources on it and rewrite it. If its as influential as you say, then that should be easy enough to do. It's past form was unacceptable. Sergecross73 msg me 17:10, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Did I do any research on how encyclopedia articles are supposed to be written? I didn't create the article. We just noticed the article as gone. If the page has not been referenced in 8 years then put it back up and I will add updated references. Underdoger (talk) 17:21, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I know you didn't create the article, I can see that you've only made 2 edits ever, starting today. (I also imagine you're Tom Kudirka, as no one except him has shown any interest in this expansion pack in 8 years, and now all of a sudden 2 people are fired up about this?) Anyways, what I meant was, if you knew how an article was to be written, and how the website works, you'd know why I redirected it (and know that questions like "What give you the right?" doesn't make any sense in this case.) Feel free to undo the redirect and make it into an article, but keep in mind 1) If you are Tom, you're going to be faced with a lot of opposition and scrutiny because you have an obvious conflict of interest, which is frowned upon here and 2) it'll get redirected again if you fail to add proper sources and content. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 17:29, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't appreciate your attitude. Very appropriate for a Wikipedia administrator. Who do you think your talking to? I'm 52 years old professional businessman whose been in the video games industry for over 15 years creating hit games like Medal of Honor: Allied Assault and assembling the team that became Infinity Ward. There's not going to be opposition and scrutiny because I will adhere to the guidelines under Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. So there will be no conflict of interest either. And there are plenty of video game developers with biographies out there. I don't have to explain myself to you at all. Wikipedia Administrators should not speak to anyone this way. Underdoger (talk) 18:12, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

How was my attitude different from yours? I answered you in the same manner you addressed me when you came on my talk page and started demanding all this "What give you the right?" and "Obviously anyone who knows video games" type lectures. Had you come on to my talk page a little more calmly, then that's the kind of response you would have gotten. That being said, all I was, was direct and to the point. I did not insult you or call you any names. Sergecross73 msg me 18:43, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Underdoger:

Please calm down and assume good faith. To ensure quality, the article needs to be neutral and have reliable sources. Before the article is restored, we need the reliable sources first. Right now, you have not guaranteed that after the article is restored you'll go and improve it. Per the Wikipedia policy WP:BURDEN, you yourself need to ensure the content is verifiable before it's visible to readers. On the flipside, we need to ensure that the article is neutral. This means that any material added should not be cherry-picked to advance a position. Hypothetically, if the game has both positive and negative reviews and you choose to provide only positive reviews, that's not maintaining neutrality. So what Serge is saying is that because you're closely involved with the subject matter this bias could be present (not saying it will be) and thus will face more opposition from other editors. Please don't take Serge's comments the wrong way. He is simply acting in the best interests of Wikipedia. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 18:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I understand and agree with you ThomasO1989. The SiN: Wages of Sin article must have reliable sources and must be neutral. I just don't agree if an article is old to simply delete it. If an article in an encyclopedia is old should it be deleted? I did not write the Wages of Sin article and I don't remember everything in the article. I guarantee that after the article is restored I will improve it. Thank you for your cooperation. Tomkudirka (talk) 14:13, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

The article was not deleted because it was "old". It was redirected because it had zero sources in it. The "8 years of being unsourced" argument I make is only noted because it shows that zero improvement has been in an extremely long time. Sometimes, people argue "Its been showing improvement" as an argument to hold off on redirecting an article. I'm just showing that no improvement has been made in a very long time. (I mean, usually, if an article didn't show improvement in a month, its not a good sign. So you can see how zero sources in 8 years sounds.) Sergecross73 msg me 14:21, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Tomkudirka: You are free to go to the history of the article in question and retrieve the revision from before the redirect. You can then copy it to your sandbox, or to the Draft space, in order to work on it. The article was just redirected, not deleted, and the old content is available to you in the article history. -- ferret (talk) 14:46, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you ferret, you're a good man. Tomkudirka (talk) 14:54, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Protected edit request

Could you take a look at the edit request in place at PC Master Race? I quickly scanned the policies, didn't seem to be anything against asking ;) No offense at all taken if you decline. :) -- ferret (talk) 00:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, wasn't on to see this until now. Looks like you got it approved though, so looks like it worked out. Sergecross73 msg me 15:58, 3 July 2015 (UTC)