User talk:Erachima

	Talk Page Archives
01 Perm. link 01	11 Perm. link 11
02 Perm. link 02	12 Perm. link 12
03 Perm. link 03	13 Perm. link 13
	04 Perm. link 04
	05 Perm. link 05
	06 Perm. link 06
	07 Perm. link 07
	08 Perm. link 08
	09 Perm. link 09
	10 Perm. link 10

This page is archived every 25 topics, by the removal of the oldest 25 topics.

Just a Hello

Hey tjstrf - long time no see! I just wanted to give you a shout out since you were one of the first people to help me on Wikipedia. I'm glad you gt involved in the Negroids debate - although I'm starting to wonder if we can possibly find a true resolution. I think no matter what some people are going to end up on happy - but the problem is no one is willing to accept that. Phew - and to think I came to that article from WP:ANI thinking such a small article will surely only have a small dispute that will pass over quickly. Now some are saying the article should be deleted, some are saying the picture should be deleted, and others are saying the exact opposite. Will it ever end? Lol, well hey, I'll talk to you later - nice to see your name again.--daniel folsom 20:54, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From fiction notability talk...

... Speaking of which, I have yet to see a suggestion with better practical potential than Iorek's earlier draft. Why aren't we using that? --tjstrf talk 23:03, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- I haven't been able to bring myself into this discussion, like I should have; I just recently spent two months in a constant policy battle and am not in a hurry to repeat it; but tjstrf, agreed fully. Please stick to that issue and continue to develop and advocate the draft insofar as your time and energy allow. It's by far a better solution than the current WP:FICTION. I can try to join in when there's a need for a bit of manpower. --Kizor 00:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC

I see Guy's back and planning to retake the encyclopedia from fans, too. *melodramatic sigh* --Kizor 21:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Wow

Rofl. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As the reviewing admin, this is not the way to do it. It lists the page in multiple places and confuses everyone dealing with it. But the suggestion to use a prod was right: actually, a prod is the only correct tag, for a hoax article cannot be deleted via speedy. Please read WP:CSD, where it says so very clearly--the reason is that what one person thinks an obvious hoax, about 5% of the time turns out not to be when others have had a chance to see it. And Speedy for non-notability does not apply to fiction--for a similar reason, what one person thinks totally unimportant another may recognize. So I've left the prod. The thing to do now is to follow up to make sure it isn't removed. There's at least one anonymous editor who is actually still working on the article! If it is removed, the thing to do is to send it to AfD, not replace the prod(for it will undoubtedly just be removed again). Good catch, by the way. DGG (talk) 16:45, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Bleach shinigami

Hi Tjstrf! I'm in the army for longer periods again, so I ask you to please please watch the List of Bleach shinigami page, and other Bleach pages, because the situation is getting out of hand with some users merging without consensus, completely changing the layout, etc. We may have to raise it to RFC, RFM or something similar. For now, please prevent certain users from vandalizing the pages. Thanks! -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 10:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha

I saw you quoted another line of "The Rose" on that stupid poll. Seriously, when I read that poll, that's what it reminded me of. Except the melodrama hadn't gotten to the point where he was passed out in a phone booth with a heroin needle in his arm, like the tragic diva in that film. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 10:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: RE: Genre categories

I only plan to arrange the naturally occuring themes for Bleach: Action, Adventure (maybe), Comedy (this should be specified), and Supernatural. I agree with you that the Drama-related topics should be deleted; it isn't 100% clear on what actually classifies as Drama. Would you consider a cfd for the Drama categories as well the removal of Drama in the genre boxes for all anime/manga? And what did you mean by this "mean" comment? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've done some extensive cleaning on genre and cats. I think Tokko is both a constant Crime genre and Crime fiction wouldn't you agree? And while you're going at it, Category:InuYasha, Category:Sailor Moon, Category:YuYu Hakusho, Category:Saint Seiya, and perhaps several others need the same kind of maintenance. I wish I had been told about this genre severity earlier, at WP:DBZ we had a BIG discussion about this right here. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:07, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On Rurouni Kenshin, is Historical fiction supposed to be wikified [[Historical fiction|Historical]]? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:16, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate everything Erachima, I will take the time to read WP:MOS-MANGA soon. As for Dragon Ball, I'd say every cat. and genre already there, as well as the Martial arts genre should be included (everyone's a martial artist in the series, this is why I think it should be set) Can we work together on this? Genre/theme specification I meant? I hope we can settle the Bleach case too. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:43, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I vaguely remember Fist of the North Star and have not watched all of Tenjho Tenge (that show is kinda boring), but I see what you're getting at; DBZ did stray from the martial arts subject and the rest was just implied. You do realize we have a lot of work to do right? I'm trying to be 'very' careful now as to not add so many cats/themes in the boxes. I could really, really use your help: Lupin III, Naruto, Fullmetal Alchemist, Black Cat, Zombie Powder, Inukami!, Black Lagoon, and others may need the same kind of attention & fixing (and let's take care of those related categories too while we're at it). I propose we make a to-do list or something. Or do you have something else in mind? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great job, though you may want to retrace your steps and add {{catmore1|[[]]}} to the ones you missed. I've gotten a few after you but we'd get the job done faster by doing this altogether. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 08:12, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What other cats. are useful? I assumed you were planning something when you did this. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 08:20, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm about to stop but I have to ask you: shouldn't Fighting Spirit (anime) be moved to Fighting Spirit (manga)? According to the page, the manga came about 10 years before an anime was made. Well, could you please do the honours and move the article? I'm just about ready to finish these few categories and hit the hay. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 09:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, that's enough for me. My last edit was at Category:Kinnikuman‎. If I have the strength I'll continue from the last contribution there and onward. Good night! Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 09:56, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you take a look at Dr. Slump‎? I couldn't decide whether kemono elements should have been added and I admit you have a knack for this stuff. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not gonna argue this, but that manga you showed me looks quite interesting. Think I'll read it someday. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cancelled? That reminds of another manga I've read. You know of a site where I can quickly read the whole +Anima? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you take a gander at Love Hina? I didn't add many categories as I once would, and Wikipedia:WikiProject 666 Satan is categorized in Category:Manga series. This I can't figure out how to remove, as it is a redudant. Help? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge tags

The merge tag does not indicate a consensus, it is meant to stimulate discussion and point out a proposed merger. Please don't remove properly posted tags. --Kevin Murray 00:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree that merger is not the correct approach in many cases, but I'd like to see more people coming to the discussion, than just those of us who watch the talk pages. Cheers! --Kevin Murray 01:00, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Bleach images

Done. I added the two images I took from Bleach: Memories of Nobody, Image:UkitakeShikaiBleachMovie.jpg and Image:KiraShikaiBleachMovie.jpg, to Category:Bleach images rather than Category:Bleach anime screenshots. Should they be added to the latter? Thanks. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 03:09, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sode no shirayuki

Don't even begin to try and correct me on japanese. I corrected a wrong translation and that's all; My correction was not completely wrong) Sode no shirayuki does not mean sleeve of white snow. Sode is sleeve, shirayuki is white snow 'no' = 's, and so sleeve's white snow. Can you understand that "sleeve's white snow" would mean that the white snow here "belongs" to the sleeve, not the other way around. Let me give you a simple example; tom's book = the book of tom. Can you see that. And therefore; Sleeve's white snow = white snow of the sleeve. Not sleeve of white snow. This is the fullest explanation i can give you as to why i am right, and you are wrong. I'm not trying to criticize you, i'm just trying to improve an article. So next time you want to correct a language, look at the real facts first, don't rely on whatever manga translation you've read. Even try running it through google translator, and you'll see that i'm not wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.14.220.47 (talk) 15:35, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you can't take the fact that i'm right, and you're wrong...

And if saying that i'm ranting/ gloating makes you feel better about your being wrong, then by all means, go ahead.

Infantile... hmmm... what i wrote was not infantile, rather, an explanation about the edit i had made which you randomly reverted saying "no. completely wrong" or something along those lines. You say that you wait for proof, yet, you had no proof that i was wrong. And that's the kind of hypocritical crap that annoys me. Don't go around calling anything ANYONE has written infantile, just because it was not within your mental capacity to read it.

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.14.220.47 (talk) 18:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Technoclassical

I couldn't resist, and I was curious how long it would take you to notice (for the record, faster than I thought). Now that I've had my fun, you're back to being the sole link. :)--Kubigula (talk) 03:33, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had previously commented on the merge proposal at WP:N and was continuing to follow the discussion. You commented several times, so I happened to click on your user page and got a chuckle out of your whatlinkshere comment. So, I decided to have a little fun with it. Cheers.--Kubigula (talk) 03:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

InuYasha

Hi Erachima. When you have the time, could you see the InuYasha article? I think I got the most correct genre and categories down pat, but I could sure use an extra pair of eyes. Happy editing! Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon Ball, DBZ, and DBGT may suffer the same "overcat" problem. Can you correct these? Much appreciated, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I took care of InuYasha but I prefer it if you would take a look. Which page(s) would be categorized Category:Anime films? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 11:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FL Main page proposal

You either nominated a WP:FLC or closed such a nomination recently. As such, you are the type of editor whose opinion I am soliciting. We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 1 2007, voting starting December 1 2007 and main page appearances starting January 1 2008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual content will resemble the current content at the featured content page. Such output would probably start at the bottom of the main page. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. Right now debate seems to be among support for the current selective democratic/consensus based proposal, a selective dictatorial approach like that used at WP:TFA or a non-selective first in line/calendar approach like that used at WP:POTD. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editor Review

I've had this thing up since July and only have 3 reviews so can you please review me, good bad, I don't care, speak your mind. Please. Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 02:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where've you been?

Hey, Erachima, I thought you'd never return. Heh, are you able to respond to my questions here? And we've still got a lot of genre cleaning to do. Hit me up on my discussion page. Thanks, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back. Hope you enjoyed your sojourn. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 04:37, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tenhjo Tenge

Hi, in answer to your question, I added the WikiProject Comics banner to Tenjho Tenge because manga are comics. In general, the anime project tends to be more interested in the manga articles than the comics project, but there's no reason not to collaborate. Cheers, GentlemanGhost (talk) 04:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Tenjho Tenge categorized in Sengoku-jidai? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:36, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Tenjo Tenge and Sengoku-jidai

Well, I'm glad you replied to something, why are you ignoring this? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I didn't know you were that busy, sorry. Perhaps add supernatural fiction to Dragon Ball anime, the three others are more prolonged to sci-fi. Tell me, what goes in the anime films cat.? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did an edit to Quincy (Bleach), are the categories there correct?‎ I'd like the other questions I asked of you answered, if possible. (PS, love the new username! It's easier to remember.) {^_^} Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:20, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you have time now to help me settle a few things (mostly category related). Please reply on my talk page. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 00:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject banners

Hey Tjstrf, I just noticed you left an edit summary including a statement that lots of Wikiproject banners make a talk page messy. Have you seen what I've done at Talk:Bobby Robson, an article covered by three projects (at the moment)... it's quite neat and tidy. Just thought you may be interested! All the best... The Rambling Man (talk) 07:04, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, just thought I'd mention it. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:08, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You posted this on my talk page

RE: Categories, etc.

Firstly, sorry yet again for my inactivity. School's been really cutting into my free time this quarter. I'll try and answer your questions now, though I'm not sure which ones are still relevant.

Quincy (Bleach) is categorized properly in my opinion, good work.
Adding Supernatural to Dragonball also seems reasonable.
(Did I answer this one already?) The anime films category would be for any theatrically released anime movies. I'm not sure if direct-to-video would qualify or not, since I think most of those are considered just OVAs.

Finally, thank you for the compliment on the new name. Have a nice day. --erachima formerly tjstrf 03:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Quincy is good. Category:Anime films will go only to the anime movies. And now, as far as the Dragon Ball anime goes, I've considered re-placing supernatural fiction (which I no longer feel is a main category/genre) with one of the following: Adventure / Fantasy. Per WP:MOS-ANIME#Content, three genres are the maximum, so, since Action and Science fiction are the most frequent, which would follow-up as a third? Please reply below and not on my talk page (as I'm watching this discussion). Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a toss-up to me. Just use whichever you think is best. The article should make it clear what type of series it is even without the infobox summary, after all. --erachima formerly tjstrf 01:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops

Actually that occurred to me and I caught your message just as I was about to ask him on his talk page - sorry 'bout that. -WarthogDemon 01:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

666 satan

ahahaha, well, admins know everything. don't they? Actually I'm a known member of the much feared IRC Cabal^TM: a user said in #wikipedia that somebody has posted a link to a illegal manga download site on a talk page, I asked which one and got there :) Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 09:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't particularly hate scanlations - I've read a few before :) WhisperToMe (talk) 12:37, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

academic team

thanks. --Headtechie2006 (talk) 04:27, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gayelle

Gayelle (lesbian), I have added many new RS to the article and therefore I would like you to reconsider your vote that was based on a previous version that did not take your WP:NEO or WP:N and WP:RS and WP:V concerns into account.NewAtThis (talk) 04:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... while your attempts at fixing the article are appreciated, I'm staying as a delete vote. Thanks for trying though, and better luck next time. --erachima formerly tjstrf 13:56, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Aleena's redlinked categories

Erachima...Just out of curiosity, what brought you to my user page to see all of the red linked categories? I know that they are there and have hope that they will either be created or reinstated. :) Have a nice day. - LA @ 05:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gift

Thanks! I definitely appreciate it. --erachima formerly tjstrf 17:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

666 Satan name change

so im wondering if maybe a call to the PR department at Viz Media upon a discussion with the reasoning for changing the name of the series will have any effect on the decision that was made (if you even wanna call it a decision, which is more of a group of ppl telling us that were wrong and there right and refusing to listen to any form of reason).... anyway, thoughts? Ancientanubis, talk Editor Review 18:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

but the legality of the venue in which the series gets out there is not the problem, what it boils down to is which name is more popular (which in my opinion does not make sense entirely), i mean according to these rules, if the series known as "kid with half black and half white hair fights people" to most American people then that is what the article should be named. and i dont think that is right, i mean what about the author of the series, he clearly named the series what he named it for a reason and it isn't right to go around changing everything on the internet to conform with an American company who changed the name for one reason or another in hopes of more people reading it (and possibly offending less people).... idk, maybe my views are just not the same as the 'admins' or w/e any more... Ancientanubis, talk Editor Review 20:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page move

Please remember that page move support/oppose votes belong on the article's talk page, NOT at the WP:RM page. Georgia guy (talk) 00:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, forgot about that. Sorry. --erachima formerly tjstrf 01:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh err

I take your comments very seriously and blp very seriously and was not being dismissive just concise. Hey, best wishes. Thanks, SqueakBox 01:26, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vanishing

..Is going HEY GUYS I'M VANISHING in all your edit summaries really the best way of going about it? Because it's on my watchlist, like, 12 times right now. --erachima talk 07:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Do I feel it is ideal? No, but I expect people would complain about incorrect edit summaries if I didn't say what I was doing and why, and there's apparently no other way to do it except to do it myself. Unfortunate, but I don't feel that staying on Wikipedia in order to implement a better way is in my best interest. If you wish to do so, I will however, applaud the attempt. In the mean time, I'm going to stick with what I can do, which is to remove the user name references which continue to spring up in search engines as that is the best I can do. FrozenPurpleCube (talk) 07:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many songs in the world

It's a big world out there - Roop Kumar Rathore is in the movies! Roop Kumar Rathod - alternate names: Roop Kumar Rathore. And maybe "Machis" was supposed to be Maachis? And this was just the first place Google brought me. Well hey! The third ghit was Roop Kumar Rathod ! And searching on "Roop kumar rathore" would get you to the same place (second hit on search here) Big place here, bigger place out there... :-) Shenme (talk) 08:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I just get interested in anything that looks like Indian English (or Strine) as an exercise in how we can communicate in this shared language. And how English 'advances' (cough!) on multiple fronts. I'd heard about the invention of 'prepone' years ago. ("Terribly sorry, sir, but due to scheduling needs your flight was preponed.") And also here I came across an article proudly detailing how a private/local group had "metalled" a town's roads. Which is an old English usage kept on in India. So... I get a "what's this new thing then...!" attitude, and go looking around. :) Shenme (talk) 04:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction) archiving issue

I'm not sure you should have archived that the way you did -- I believe that normal archiving practice would be to archive sections where there hasn't been any change in a few days, not sections started a week ago. Several of those sections had edits from today, for example, and the discussion, however painfully and tediously long, was still going on. Anyway, just my two cents' worth... thanks. -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 19:22, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zanbato

I think we've already discussed this, but I'm not digging through your archives to be certain. I initially suggested removing the myriad of pop culture references altogether many, many months ago, so I've got no problem with it. However, the games Final Fantasy VIII and Final Fantasy X actually do reference the weapon by name. I don't see why you'd want to remove the only semi-credible information that's been added to the bottom of that page in years. "Final Fantasy only" is not what I was going for, as you probably noticed I removed the bullshit addition about Cloud Strife's "big sword" resembling a zanbato in the same edit. Nevertheless, call it as you will, I'm not gonna argue. I'm pretty much done with Wikipedia these days. Gamer Junkie ^{T / C} 07:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't being biased or hypocritical at all. The additions you've mentioned, every last one of them, have never mentioned that the weapon used by Ruroni Kenshin or Naruto or whatever else is specifically named a zanbato or similar Japanese translation. If indeed they are, then by all means add them with references that prove this. Quotes from characters or game manuals will suffice. "Cavalry Sword" is not adequate. If you must, use the original Japanese translations where the weapon is labelled "zanbato". I would be more than happy to keep them if you were to do this. Not only would it provide the article with much needed referencing, but it would stop the constant additions that make no reference whatsoever to the weapon as a zanbato simply because it's a "big sword" or "looks like one". Gamer Junkie ^{T / C} 08:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand. Why didn't you simply add them yourself? It could have saved us quite a bit of hassle. Gamer Junkie ^{T / C} 09:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Self evident perhaps to somebody familiar with the mangas and animes or somebody who visits articles about those characters. Most people don't, like myself. You need references for each and every article, that's how it works. Otherwise it's OR. Gamer Junkie ^{T / C} 09:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate it if you'd stop speaking to me in such an obnoxious manner. This is nonsense. There were no references or links to other such articles of any kind. You know this. As far as the gaming goes, I'm not a fan of Japanese pop culture such as anime and manga. To suggest that I, or anybody else for that matter, should know this information already is completely unfair. Gamer Junkie ^{T / C} 09:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to butt in but, I was thinking, would it be too much if I re-added Zabuza Momochi and Kisame Hoshigaki from Naruto, who also wield zanbatō-sized swords? Or do you folks really want a WP:SOURCE confirming such obvious statements? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would say no. "Zanbato-sized swords" could just as easily be zweihander. Both are big swords designed to cut down horses and pikemen, but they aren't the same weapon. A zanbato is a specific weapon. It would be the same as adding a fictional gun from a game based on a real gun and passing it off as that. Unless there is actual proof that these weapons you've mentioned are actually zanbatos, you shouldn't add them. If you look at the article now, you'll see what I mean, as Erachima has already added references for a couple of the swords mentioned. Gamer Junkie ^{T / C} 06:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments at WP:FICT

I note your comment at WT:FICT and would be grateful if you could try and remain civil. --Gavin Collins (talk) 19:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Himura Kenshin

Started a new discussion here. Feel free to join.--Tintor2 (talk) 16:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note

Just to make you aware of the section ("ruined Wikipedia") at User:U-Two. It includes you (first). StewieGriffin! • Talk Sign Listen 14:52, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bleach-related deletions

It appears that Collectonian is at it again, this time seeking to delete several articles, one of which survived 2 previous AfDs (Soul Reaper (Bleach)). Links:

Cheers, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 18:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ghosts of Onyx GA review

Thanks for the review. I have a few clarifications to make. First off, I added a character section, but I was unsure about what information could be used to make a 'publication' history section. Secondly, about the Dyson Sphere... it actually is in the heart of the planet, so you'll have to blame Nylund for creative license... :P Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 02:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the clarification. I'll pop you a line here when I'm done. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 03:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does it look better now? I'm going to add some text citations for a bit of it, but in terms of what you were looking for to pass. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 03:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:List of Bleach antagonists

Fair enough. I consider "antagonist turned into friend of protagonist" not to really be an antagonist per se, but I can see where you're coming from. The relevant model was List of Naruto antagonists, which is a bit easier to classify. For the characters that were antagonists stopped being so, they're listed in the "Other characters" section of List of Naruto characters. I can see that this is more problematic for Bleach, but again, I wouldn't really consider Byakuya, Ishida, Renji, and so on to be antagonists per se in the greater context of the story. Ideally, the Bleach antagonists list would have Aizen, Gin, Tosen, the Espada, whatever random arrancar we care to include, and notable hollows (Grand Fisher is the only one that comes to the top of my head). sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 05:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Loli in Canada

Your re-deletion of data is being disputed on the talk page. Please address your concerns more specifically so this can be resolved. Tyciol (talk) 10:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Philitas of Cos

Thanks for the review and for the fixes to Philitas of Cos. Eubulides (talk) 03:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA reviews

FYI, GA reviews are now done on a subpage that is linked to on the GA nomination template. I believe this was primarily done for the purpose of User:GimmeBot updating the {{ArticleHistory}} template correctly. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 03:52, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a hello

Hey tjs ... uh .... Erachima; just wanted to give you a hello since i had only recently come back from a very long wikibreak, and I wanted to see how are you doing. I hope you're not still involved in that Negroid debate - I expect that's still going on .. lol--daniel folsom 03:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh very nice! I've mainly been working with spotlight, and I'm actually making a lot more mainspace edits than I did before; although, with the start of school coming & with me trying to get back to work on Wikipedia in other areas, the frequency of my edits will probably drop down pretty soon. From a distant perspective your article seems pretty solid; I wish I could review it myself, but sadly I probably need a refresher on WP policy, and even then I'm not familiar at all with articles on that subject, but I'm sure you'll find someone soon! Good luck, and thanks for the response; it's great to hear from you.--daniel folsom 04:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh really? I didn't know that about WP:GA! Thanks! Hey - if the article isn't done within 2 months (which it'll probably be - but you never know, sometimes editors can be lazy (whereas I'm usually lazy, but have bursts of energy at inappropriate times – haha, I'll actually have to force myself to edit less when school starts- can't afford any more mediocre grades :!), then I will review it. I say two months because that's probably how long it'll take me to remember everything :)--daniel folsom 05:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whedonesque.com GA review

Per User:Nixeagle/GA, the reviewer has been owing me a re-review of the article for several days now. If you wouldn't mind reviewing it, I'd appreciate another set of eyes on it. As is, if you'll review the talk page, I do appear to have addressed all the reviewers concerns--the only remaining question was whether they had been addressed satisfactorily. Jclemens (talk) 05:27, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]