User talk:Spidey104/2015 Archive

Movies and sets

Re your move, I am not at all familiar with WP film protocols and I have attachment to movies vs films, but am I wrong in thinking that as the name of the visitor centre would appear to be "Hobbiton Movie Set", that this move should either be reversed, or amended to "Hobbiton movie set"? Ben Mac Dui 12:50, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If the location was in fact named "Hobbiton Movie Set" I believe that would be the correct name for the article, but based on this link the tour site is called "Hobbiton Tours" and they refer to it as "the Hobbiton movie set" but it is not named "Hobbiton Movie Set." It's a subtle difference, but for Wikipedia protocol it is important, because the Wikipedia standard is to call movies films. The Film WikiProject is the place to look for more information. If you disagree with my assessment of the situation I am more than willing to continue discussing it here. Cheers! Spidey104 21:43, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well the website is hobbitontours.com but just about the first thing on the home page is "Discover the real Middle-Earth at the Hobbiton™ Movie Set". I have a mini-guide book. Somewhat confusingly the front page says:

hobbiton movie set & farm tours
from the lord of the rings trilogy
Hobbiton Movie Set

The upper and lower cases above are per the document.Ben Mac Dui 18:38, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You do have a point with the information you just posted, but I'm not an expert on naming conventions. I would suggest starting a move discussion on the talk page so other editors can post their opinions and come to a consensus that is in line with the naming conventions. Spidey104 19:51, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I will alert WikiProject Film too. Ben Mac Dui 19:33, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Spider-Man storyline list

If you feel it's ready then I am ok with you setting up as an article now. Definitely with all the work I am done. I am exhausted! Even if I feel it's ready I would be more comfortable if we cite all part of the list at one point. I usually feel more comfortable about the quality of the article that way. Feel free to fix any mistakes I might have done too. Happy editing!. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 02:21, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and moved it to be a full article, because I feel it is good enough to be one now. It's already better than some lists I've seen out there. You put a lot of effort into the article and it shows. Thank you! I agree that citations for every entry would be a good idea, but that isn't something that has to be completed before moving it to be a full article. We can slowly add those as we have time, and having it as a full article means other editors will see it and potentially add them. Spidey104 13:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I made various edits. Great article! JosephSpiral (talk) 01:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@JosephSpiral: thank you for your various edits! Spidey104 14:10, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your common.css page

Hi; I notice that in User:Spidey104/common.css you have the CSS rule

.ambox-Orphan{display: inherit !important;}

- please note that there is an error in this (almost certainly copied from an old version of Template:Orphan#Visibility) which causes incorrect display in some browsers.

To check this, visit this page and look at the second bullet (the one that precedes the text "This article is an orphan ..."). If this bullet is not in the same alignment as the other four, but displaced to the left, you can fix it by altering inherit to table in the CSS rule mentioned earlier. If that doesn't work either, alter it to block.

Template:Orphan#Visibility has been amended. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:25, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the notice, but I don't need that page anymore so I had it deleted. Spidey104 12:21, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's another solution

- but if you ever need the feature again, you can copy the revised rule from Template:Orphan#Visibility. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:08, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information, but the reason why I had that (now deleted) page was for easy access to what pages link there. I don't know if the tool is new or if I've just found it more recently but on the left-hand sidebar there's a quick link for that and I don't use the 'Orphan' tool anymore. I would have deleted the page earlier, but I couldn't remember what it was called. So thank you for bringing it up as that obviously reminded me of the name. Spidey104 13:12, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The "What links here" link in the left margin has been around since at least September 2004, which is when Help:What links here was created. I guess that you weren't aware of it when you made this post; at the time, I didn't realise that was what you were asking for, for which I (belatedly) apologise. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the apology. If what I needed had been around for near 10 years I can understand why you'd assume I already knew about it. Even though I've been editing for a while there are still things for me to learn. Spidey104 18:42, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A more concrete source for Spider-Man inclusion

I'd be more prone to use this source as the source for the Spidy inclusion. Please add to the page and remove the Forbes source. Npamusic (talk) 20:08, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That one also works, but what do you think of The Guardian article I added here? My point is that it's not appropriate for us to use an article that mixes news with opinion because Wikipedia is only for news and not opinions, whether or not we agree with those opinions. Spidey104 20:12, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

TriiipleThreat does not like it, so we'll try your source. Thank you for showing it to me! Spidey104 20:16, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Superman Input

Hi, I'm proposing using Alex Ross' image of Superman in the Superman article's infobox. The proposal on the talk page can be found here. Please let me know what you think. Thanks! JosephSpiral (talk) 13:41, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July Spider-Man work

Thank you!. I am just getting started. Maybe even to the point it could potentially be a FA. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 22:06, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Midtown High School AFD

I welcome your thoughts here. I was going to show you the article even before the AFD anyways. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 04:41, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Midtown

Midtown High School was supposed to be one of two fictional places that I planned to create an article of. This is the other. Hopefully maybe in the future we can dig up sources for the fictional facility so we don't have merge requests if we do get bold and plan on creating it. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 22:55, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A full Ravencroft article would require lots of work and supporting references because its appearances are sparse. I'd support the article, but I don't know if I would be able to contribute much to it. Definitely start that one as a user workpage first. Spidey104 02:08, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Other Spider-Man articles

Thanks (and sorry I responded so late). I am glad my work is appreciated. I appreciate your work too and understand that you aren't as active as you used to be. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 22:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

WP:NOTBROKEN can save you time. And having just had to change a number of non-piped links lacking a DAB at a dozen pages to allow for an agreed-to article name change, I can point out that redirects left in place can be useful down the line. - Gothicfilm (talk) 00:31, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've had this discussion before. They are not broken, but they are sloppy. Leaving behind messy redirects is one (of many) reasons why Wikipedia is still not treated with respect by the general public. I leave in place redirects that could be useful down the line, but those are few and far between. Spidey104 13:48, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How is it any different than removing deprecated parameters? Spidey104 01:20, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article for Deletion: Michigan State Miracle

Hello! There is an article that has been nominated for deletion regarding the Michigan State football team. I noticed you were an alumni, so I thought I would let you know in case you have any interest in participating with the discussion. If so, please just click on the Title as I have linked it straight to the page's deletion review. If you wish to see the article itself, it is titled Michigan State Miracle. Any thoughts, ideas, or edits that would help improve the page itself would also be appreciated! Thanks! Stubbleboy 17:07, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to a research survey

Hello Spidey104 , I am Qi Wu, a computer science MS student at the University of Minnesota - Twin Cities. Currently, we are working on a project studying the main article and sub article relationship in a purpose of better serving the Wikipedia article structure. It would be appreciated if you could take 4-5 minutes to finish the survey questions. Thanks in advance! We will not collect any of your personally information.

Thank you for your time to participate this survey. Your response is important for us!

https://umn.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_bvm2A1lvzYfJN9H

Here is the link to our Meta:Research page. Feel free to sign up if you want to know the results! https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Main/sub-article_relationship

Wuqi333444 (talk) 05:23, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings". :) BOZ (talk) 18:58, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]