User talk:TheFarix/Archive 9

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

→

Replace deprecated infobox components

On Gakuen Heaven your history comments "replace deprecated infobox components". (The infobox is animanga/Header.) I see that the "type" of anime (shonen ai excuse spelling) was removed, but I figure you know what you are doing. I also see that you removed some unnecessary trivia, which is superb - it seems fans sometimes clutter these articles quite a bit. I am new to this subject in wikipedia, and I'd like to learn more for future reference. Could you point me at the latest policy governing what goes in the boxes, perhaps specifically why the 'change' (if any)? Thanks. Tkech (talk) 05:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC)tkech

Separate List for Destiny

I think the List of Mobile Suit Gundam SEED characters would look a lot better if we remove all the characters that are introduced in Destiny and create a separate List of Mobile Suit Gundam SEED Destiny characters. Just like we did with all the Gundam shows that took place during the Universal Century. What do you think? Shaneymike (talk) 15:02, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I haven't looked at the Gundam SEED articles, but that does sound reasonable if there were a lot of new characters introduced in the second series. —Farix (t | c) 15:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and started a separate list of characters for Destiny. It needs work, I know. Feel free to clean it up as needed. I'll work on it some more when I get a chance. Thanks. And yes there were a lot of new characters introduced in Destiny. Shaneymike (talk) 22:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello TheFarix! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 944 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Shinya Suzuki - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 15:11, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Pokemon: Pikachu

Actually, that section was removed by a vandal who replaced the entire section with a single word. This word was later removed by another editor without restoring the section, and there was no discussion about that section on the talk page. Thus, I assumed that it had merely been missed by whoever was reverting the vandalism, rather than it being removed intentionally. It was actually not original research either, since it was verifiable that that censoring of the U.S. releases had taken place. If you would like, I could try to find sources, rather than just having the entire section deleted. Please let me know. Thanks! :) Daishokaioshin (talk) 20:56, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:WikiProject Anime and manga redirects

Removed prod from Rising Star Forums.

Hello I removed the proposed deletion tag from this article because an editor protested its deletion on the talk page. Proposed deletion is only for completely uncontroversial deletion of articles where nobody objects. You can still nominate it at articles for deletion if you believe it should be deleted. Thank you. -- Atama頭 01:28, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Ann company

Template:Ann company has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:08, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

G-Anime

Hi,

Can you give me your opinion on G-Anime. I'm unsure that it meets whatever applicable notability guideline. I don't feel neutral enough to make any edit around this article after being involved in this article French Wikipedia Afd. Thanks. --KrebMarkt 13:59, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

The article needs massive cleanup and restructuring to fall in line with other convention articles. Talk a look at Sakura-Con and Tsubasacon for guidelines. The Language and attendance sections should be removed. The language ratio is unimportant and the attendance figures are listed in the event table. I'm not sure what to make of that Media Coverage section. It shouldn't be there, but the links appear valid and would demonstrate notability. They should be converted and used as references. —Farix (t | c) 14:50, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I've moved the links to the talk page. The first one appears to be a republished press release. The second link is to a blog. The two radio interviews are the only things that could possible establish notability, but that's pretty weak at best. —Farix (t | c) 18:43, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

List of Rozen Maiden characters

I was wondering somthing. Rather then saying that SuiGin Tou was a strong player in the Alice Game in season one, wouldn't you just say that she was The all around strongest player as was shown by the way she handles not only Shinku, But Hina-Ichigo, SuiSeiSeki, and SouSeiseki at the same time in episode 11? (Sorry i couldn't find a way to send you a direct message) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunnykitten (talk • contribs) 20:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

It's your own interpretation of these series. But it can't be included in the article. —Farix (t | c) 21:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

List of one-time characters in The Simpsons

I have relisted List of one-time characters in The Simpsons for deletion. Apparently this was one discussed before when it was known as List of one-time characters from The Simpsons. Most people have left the project since the list was known by that name. I see that you are still active and wanted to notify you of this posting. JBsupreme (talk) 17:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Source link on Anime Expo

I see you changed the ref line for the dispute, but the link was also removed. Was that intentional? --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 17:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, because it is still not a reliable source. —Farix (t | c) 19:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

...ANN is not a reliable source? --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 19:49, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Huh? The ANN link should still be there. But the other link that you were trying to use still isn't reliable. —Farix (t | c) 19:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not seeing the ANN link. I see ^ "Multiple Anime Expo Staffers Resign in Board Dispute". Anime News Network. January 11, 2010. in plaintext, but there's no hyperlink. --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 20:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Banned banners and talk headers

And you know that it ain't no good! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 19:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

A peace offering

Hi. We got off to a bad start, at times I haven't helped the situation by winding you up. Honestly I don't think it is worth arguing over. Whether I was or was not right to nominate any of the anime articles for deletion I accept that you have more knowledge about the topic than I do and I was actually surprised to see that actually you are not as biased as I had thought as you agreed to merge them. I had considered actually you were the sort to strong keep any anime/manga related article based on "invading our turf". But I think you know more about what or what is not notable within the project than I do, having a deep knowledge of the topic. So I have proposed a way of tagging articles using a project tag which could be merged but without any work pressure or "demanding". Please accept what I have to say and we can discuss within the project without a bad atmosphere at AFDs. Regards. ‡ Himalayan ‡^ΨMonastery 16:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Frankly, I don't have any reason to work with you. Nihonjoe's description of you as a bull in a china shop is quite appropriate as you come into an area that you admitted of having little knowledge about, demand certain work be done or else the articles will be deleted. And when other editors point out that while the articles are not ideal, they do comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, you get snippy with them, state that they are not doing enough, call the entire subject area embarrassing and demagoging it as "kid's cartoons", and try to throw your "experience" around as if the rest of us were "noobs". Then go to a similar AfD and make a deliberately facetious comment and twist my points completely out of context and later declare a campaign of disruption. Put simply, I don't trust you or your intentions. My best advice is to stay out of it until you learn more about the subject area, and to stop attacking the anime project until you understand what they are doing and have already done. You made far too many assumptions about the subject, other editors, and the project, which ultimately proved to be wrong. And all of your efforts have been nothing more than one big disruptive distraction. —Farix (t | c) 13:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

King of the Hill

I could've sworn that it read "animated sitcom" when I reverted it back. A genuine mistake, please accept my apologies :) --5 albert square (talk) 19:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Dragonball Character list

hey check my respnse in the Dragonball character list talk page (Salito149 (talk) 20:21, 14 February 2010 (UTC))

Give me an example of what you mean third party, like what does Trunks have that Goten needs to have a separate article ? (Salito149 (talk) 20:25, 14 February 2010 (UTC))

Start with the reception section. Though to me, the one on Trunks is a little too thin on coverage and the article probably should be merged/redirected to the main list. This is why you don't point to one article as a reason to keep or recreate another article. (Read WP:OSE) —Farix (t | c) 20:29, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

i belive the offical website to the jump ultimate stars game is a reliable third party scource, an this game has no part of dragonball

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ds/ajuj/index.html&ei=wFx4S_-VLOT98QassJn0CQ&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CBgQ7gEwAw&prev=/search%3Fq%3Djump%2Bultimate%2Bstars%2Bwebsite%26hl%3Den

The cd single By is by this man http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hironobu_Kageyama an even this website shows the song on his profile unless ya wrong an ya not a reliable 3rd party reliabilty

as to the commercials how is anyone suppose to show were it came from how else am i suppose to show you the commercial is offical cause theres no place were they have all the commercails unless i show you the products them self of what the commercial is about 3rd party reliability ?

(Salito149 (talk) 20:41, 14 February 2010 (UTC))

The game is part of the franchise and does not count, nor does the commercial for DBZ related merchandise. The single is also one of DBZ's many theme songs and doesn't count as third-party either. The fact that you keep pointing to all of these first-party sources shows that you have no idea what Wikipedia's standards are. —Farix (t | c) 20:47, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

the standards make no sense like you. ok if thats the case Trunks, Gohan an frieza has no real world content either, but Goten is deffinatly a Main character in the series. with more major battles then Frieza, cell an Majin buu, the main characters son, going through many different movies as the star, bio broly, broly the second coming, a good role in wrath of the dragon, fusion reborn, over 7 major battles, an even has a big part in Akira toyrima up in coming game mmorpg of his view of what happens after Dragonball z, which is dragonball online now i belive you can agree with me on that. (Salito149 (talk) 20:58, 14 February 2010 (UTC))

I wouldn't consider him a main character as he is not the main focus of the series (how many battles the character is involved in is irrelevant). He is a rather significant secondary character. However that is neither here or there and is not something I want to debate on my talk page. —Farix (t | c) 21:02, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

theres 2 things either somethings wrong with you or you just dont listen alright what ever (Salito149 (talk) 21:06, 14 February 2010 (UTC))

Zoroark

Reliable sources are now available; check my latest comment on the talk page. The admin who protected wants a new consensus, apart from the blatant opposes we have stated concerning the fact that there were no reliable sources.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:57, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Figma

An article that you have been involved in editing, Figma, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Figma. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 06:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Sgt. Frog‎ and WP:WikiProject Television

How is having a television show part of WP:WikiProject Television "totally redundent"? WikiProject Television is "an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to television programs and related subjects on Wikipedia." Just because no one added the WikiProject Television template to "every other anime series article" doe's not mean you should remove it from the Sgt. Frog‎ article. If you think anime television shows should not be part of WikiProject Television then start a discussion at WT:WikiProject Television as I did a search at WikiProject Television and WP:WikiProject Anime and manga and I could not find any discussion about anime television shows not being part of WikiProject Television. Powergate92Talk 20:45, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

There has been a long standing agreement between WP:TV and WP:ANIME since around 2006 that articles should not have both templates since WP:TV is one of the parent projects of WP:ANIME to reduce template clutter and redundancy on talk pages. WP:ANIME has similar agreements with WP:JAPAN and WP:COMIC with cross tagging of only a few of the core topics. If WP:TV wants to change that agreement, then they should be the ones to initiate a discussion with WP:ANIME first instead of randomly adding a tag to an article of a random series. —Farix (t | c) 20:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Can you show me a link to the "agreement between WP:TV and WP:ANIME" as I could not find that agreement when I did a search at WikiProject Television and WikiProject Anime and manga. Powergate92Talk 21:13, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

There wasn't a single point of discussion about double tagging, it was something that evolved early on between different editors. However, if WP:TV is going to start tagging anime articles now, its going to affect approximately 2,000 articles and should be discussed with the entire projects instead of upsetting an apple cart on two articles. And if you throw in the comics, and Japanese projects, that's at least 9,000 articles that will be tripled or quadrupled, tagged (or more once you throw in film and gaming) as routine practice. There are already enough complaints about overtagging by WikiProject. —Farix (t | c) 21:33, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Porygon

Do you feel like handling this? I've had too many reversions and pointed him toward the talk page multiple times already. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 02:55, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Chara egg

I have no opinion on whether there should be an article on this band; I simply didn't think that it qualified for speedy deletion. Nyttend (talk) 16:25, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

List of Ōkami Kakushi episodes

You may remember me as the person who hypothesized about the werewolf connection in Ōkami Kakushi. That unfortunate disagreement aside, I would like to request assistance in updating and maintaining the List of Ōkami Kakushi episodes page. I am not a registered administrator and have little experience in creating and maintaining such lists, and as such, my plot summariestend to be overly detailed and in some need of streamlining. However, it seems as though I am the only one visiting and updating that article, which I have noticed has fallen behind. My recent attempt to update it to include Episode 10 resulted in a pretty little tag reading "'paqiwjef'cq

a/esdjcba/wsdBC 'iasewnfCawbvesdfcQ a?.,FBDC;/A Sugsd'amwESdfcae_osDKC'AWesfdC awdcb/alz bdcv[pQWUABHNFCAWVSDOFCBAWESDF Ca:ESCIudb aEWLjb sdfcp[gwabEFDc awdfc;uabw nE?fsdcv[w9aegfsdcqwaeSz 8aswehnrfdcawkuebsdfc;lsavwzlfcna wsefvc;aliwybzse cvdjgvwsze rdfc vawsezidkfcb n.wza,secv wes Dfcvwakzes cfvdesrdz vawersdfycvbaweszdgvaersdGbaerusgvw eSFVAWIEKBSD FVLER" and listing the links to the ANC website as "Cite errors". I don't know what to make of it or do about it. Can you help me with this? 75.157.110.77 (talk) 19:18, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for flipping the switch over XXX_other parameters in the animanga infobox. --KrebMarkt 16:40, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

There were some IPs still edit warning about the use of the fields, So I figured it was better to remove it altogether now that they fields have been deprecated for roughly 5 months. Though I would have preferred to waited another month before removing the fields from the template, but unfortunately, some editors didn't want to get the message —Farix (t | c) 12:42, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Blacklist

Just seen your comment in deletions regarding the addition of mangaupdates to the blacklist. I think it's probably wise for the "large" copyvio sites to be compiled and mass requested.Dandy Sephy (talk) 17:09, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I've tried that once last year, but it didn't go anywhere. —Farix (t | c) 17:11, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Anime and Manga editing dispute

I don't want to have to report the both of us for Edit warring, let's both assume good faith and try and resolve our differences. If you can point at Wikipedia policy pages saying that my edits were not helpful then I will back down. If you cannot refer to Wikipedia policy pages I will request Editor assistance and go ahead and report us for Edit warring. If those actions don't lead a resolution then I will request Arbitration. I notice you are a member of WikiProject Anime and Manga, maybe we can refer to them for a Third opinion. --Koolabsol (talk) 13:12, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Editing dispute

07:53, March 25, 2010 TheFarix (talk | contribs) (43,266 bytes) (Reverted good faith edits by Koolabsol; What was removed shouldn't have been removed. (TW)) (undo)
07:59, March 25, 2010 Koolabsol (talk | contribs) m (42,446 bytes) (Undid revision 351952000 by TheFarix (talk) Exactly what shouldn't have been removed? And why not just put it back?) (undo)
08:05, March 25, 2010 TheFarix (talk | contribs) (43,550 bytes) (Reverted 1 edit by Koolabsol; Editorial notes, white spaces in headers, custom portal image. all of it. (TW)) (und

Your edits weren't helpful at all. They removed several editorial comments, such as the notes about Wikipe-tan's image on Anime and the note about not adding more external links, which were placed there by other editors to deal with ongoing problems. By removing these editorial notes, you are inviting the problems to return. Also, there is no point in removing whitespaces in section headings. The WP:MOS states that the whitespaces are acceptable, and mass removing of these witespaces from numerous articles is completely unexceptionable based on a previous ArbCom ruling. And exactly what is the point of removing Wikipe-tan's image from the portal templates? If optional images were not acceptable, than it would be allowed by the template. Beyond those, the rest of your changes are extremely trivial and there is no reason for you to insist on maintaining them. —Farix (t | c) 13:29, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Policy pages for some things have been provided but in the second half of your paragraph you stray from Wikipedia policy into personal opinion. What you have linked to holds up for Anime but not for Manga. I will explain why.
"And exactly what is the point of removing Wikipe-tan's image from the portal templates? If optional images were not acceptable, than it would be allowed by the template. Beyond those, the rest of your changes are extremely trivial and there is no reason for you to insist on maintaining them."
I remove category images as part of my general cleaning. I see not reason not to remove it, same as there is no reason to remove it. Whether you view the changes as minor or not, all contributions made to enhance Wikipedia are welcome and wanted. --Koolabsol (talk) 14:49, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

They do seem to be completely needless edits that don't seem to achieve anything. Your reasoning for removing the image for example is rather questionable. If there is no reason to remove it, don't remove it. Saying there is no reason not to remove it is a pretty weak argument for making unnecessary changes, then you seem confused when someone objects and make it into a bigger deal then it should be. Exactly what are you trying to achieve by suggesting third party intervention for what are meaningless edits in the first place?Dandy Sephy (talk) 15:08, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

"I see not reason not to remove it". Than you should not remove it. Edits that are made for no reason are frivolous edits and should generally be avoided. Removing the image from the portal template is not an improvement nor does it "enhance Wikipedea" in any way. So trying to hide behind that empty argument won't work. Also, my comments and the MOS and ArbCom lists I provided apply to both articles. You made a set of unnecessary edits to both articles, and in case of the editorial notes, dehancing Wikipedia. I reverted those edits. Now you are all huffy because your frivolous edits got reverted. Time to move on and stop waiting everyone's time. —Farix (t | c) 18:43, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah? Let's see about that. --Koolabsol (talk) 01:50, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Am I to interpret that as some sort of threat? If so, than you'll shortly find yourself on the loosing end. —Farix (t | c) 01:51, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Twinkle access revoked

As you are using Twinkle to edit war (examples: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]), your access to use the tool has been revoked. You may have access restored should you promise to stop using it to edit war (and yes, I do understand that you were only trying to maintain the status quo, but using Twinkle to revert back and forth is not acceptable). ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:10, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

While it was not my intention to edit war, Koolabsol crossed a line when he decided to be disruptive and revert the restoration of the editorial comments, portal image, and optional whitespaces dispute being informed that he edits were more damaging than productive. Personally, I find his actions a direct violation of ArbCom's ruling on optional styles. Not only has he ignored WP:BRD cycle on these two articles, he is also ignoring it at Template:Anime and manga as well. He first removed the whitespaces, which I reverted because it affected the templates readability. He then restores his original edit stating that my claim or readability was "false".[6] This isn't someone who is editing in good faith, but editing out of spite. —Farix (t | c) 18:03, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

I understand that. However, the only issue here is that Twinkle was used to further a content dispute. Koolabsol has already indicated that he will not be using Twinkle (or any other tool) to edit war in the future, so access has been restored. All I need from you here is a similar pledge to not use Twinkle in such a manner again. That's it. The dispute regarding the content or style of the page can be addressed elsewhere and at a different time. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:30, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll agree so long as Koolabsol also self-reverts the removal of whitespaces in Template:Anime and manga and observes WP:BRD. If he refused to observe WP:BRD, then it is a non-started for me and I believe his Twinkle should not have been restored until after he agrees to observe WP:BRD. —Farix (t | c) 23:38, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Your agreeing is not contingent upon his agreeing to anything. As I already stated, however, he has stated that he will not be using Twinkle in an abusive manner, and I've stated the consequences for doing so on his talk page very clearly. All that we need from you here is an agreement to not use Twinkle to edit war. Period. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less. If you agree, Twinkle access will be restored. Then any discussion regarding content or spacing in other articles can be taken to the appropriate venue (I suggest WT:ANIME in order to get a wider audience). ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 00:04, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

sigh* Very well. I won't use Twinkle for anything other than article maintenance. But I still think it is incumbent on him to self-revert on Template:Anime and manga and open a discussion as to why the whitespaces shouldn't be in the template. —Farix (t | c) 00:11, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Your access has been restored. If you want to open a discussion regarding the other stuff, please let me know as I'm interested in participating. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:14, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Bakugan - Flags

Yes, you are correct that the column heading clearly labels Japanese airdates. But my logic is that as you scroll down through the the list the header moves off the screen. If someone is not paying close enough attention they lose track of what each column stand for, so a simple flag by the date tells you right away that it is the the air date in Japan. I don't know if the Japanese language editions would air in any other country, but if it does someone, in theory, could put their country's airdate in that column as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.136.26.235 (talk) 02:38, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

According the the MOS:FLAG, the excessive use of flag icons should be avoided. I'm also growing concerned about the number of English language airdates. The field is generally used for the first English airdate with rebroadcasts ignored. Of course the issue of the US and Canada broadcasts switching back and forth could be an exception. —Farix (t | c) 02:48, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects

It seems that there are two ways to do this, your edit [7] or mine. Just FYI - both methods work, see: [8] --Funandtrvl (talk) 01:11, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that there is no guarantee that a biography tagged with {{WikiProject Anime and manga}} and {{UnreferencedBLP}} will have |biography-work-group= set like it should. That is why it is better to use the wildcard until the bot uses banner transclusions to create its results over categories. —Farix (t | c) 01:40, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem. There are still a few that aren't working, what is the usual code for wildcards? What do the astericks do? --Funandtrvl (talk) 01:44, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

It's whatever the characters bot's programmer decides to treat as wildcards. Okip, the bot's programmer, has set aside the asterisk as a wildcard character in the bot's programming. In the case of the Animanga project, it includes the categories that end with "anime and manga articles". Thus it will catch all of the quality assessment categories. I would advice that you don't undo any more wildcards without first consulting Okip about problems. And I especially wouldn't add the articles into the project's main cat without consulting with the project. From my experience, this renders the project's main cat completely unnavigable. —Farix (t | c) 01:56, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I got it. --Funandtrvl (talk) 01:59, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

List of Naruto Antagonists edits

Really, I think that it was a little premature to add that Kabuto's brought Akatsuki's dead members back, but while we're at it, look at the broad scope of talk pages that are being used as forums for discussion of the general topic and for speculation. For example, I came across a massive two-person arguement on the List of Claymore characters talk page, and no-one interceded there telling them "Wikipedia is not a forum" or deleating their entries. I know that doesn't give me the right to use the List of Naruto Antagonists talk page as such, but the point is that your efforts and the efforts of other Wikipedia admins to keep the articles free of such content is being undermined by ignorant users such as myself. I admit I am in the wrong, but I think that we should keep our eye on that new development in case something worth adding to the article comes of it. That was all I was trying to say. 75.157.110.77 (talk) 21:34, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

If there are similar issues on other talk pages then fix it. Don't complain because you received a warning about it while others have gone unnoticed. —Farix (t | c) 22:32, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello, TheFarix. You have new messages at User_talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects#Subcategories.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

See tim's response, there is project banner's transclusions instead of categories. Okip 13:54, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

That's easier said than done. I'll do what I can, but that doesn't mean I'll make a difference: I'm still an ameteur, so I may make things worse than they already are. Thanks for the advice, though. 75.157.110.77 (talk) 18:37, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Asuka Article Help

Thanks for the help, very much appreciated! Fox816 (talk) 22:19, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello, TheFarix. You have new messages at Stillwaterising's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Zock page

Whoa whoa, hang on a sec. I didn't totally redo that article from a pile of garbage to a properly sourced and encyclopedic article for someone to come by and redirect it without so much as a word of discussion edgewise. Can we talk about this? MalikCarr (talk) 02:29, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I checked though the article before merging it to the list. There was no third-party coverage of the mobile suit cited in the article. The fact that merchandising, such as video games and model kits, exists doesn't make the Zock notable. All of the links supporting the model kit section were to catalogs of retail websites, like HobbyLink Japan, and doesn't count as third-party coverage. —Farix (t | c) 20:02, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Move of Freezing (manhwa) to Freezing (comics)

The consensus to rename was clear. While there is some concern with the lack of sources, the consensus was that if it was an American publication, then a comic disambiguation would be the most accurate. If sources are provided to show that there is a better disambiguation, then the article can be moved again. As to the wording in the article, clearly it needs help but this is not an area for me to do a rewrite. I'll leave it to the other editors. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:06, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

re Much appropriated

You meant appreciated ??? :P -- Cirt (talk) 23:59, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 00:03, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for assisting my edits while i was trying to source Animanga BLPs. I closed the store of the First Animanga unsourced BLP clean-up drive. Well i know that you know that the clean-up continues at Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Unreferenced BLPs. Thanks for your assistance. --KrebMarkt 07:45, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Inclusion link

I've noticed all the 'Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions.' messages in AfDs; presumably that's template generated. Do you think it would be possible for that template to also automatically link my CSE's search results? --Gwern (contribs) 22:45 26 April 2010 (GMT)

{{delsort}} is a general template used by multiple delsort projects. There is no way to hack in your CSE, and any forced version of the template will not be recognized by the various delsorting scripts like the one I use. —Farix (t | c) 00:34, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I see. That's too bad. --Gwern (contribs) 00:44 27 April 2010 (GMT)

Assuming Good Faith

Still want to agf for these editors? [[9]] [[10]] [[11]]. The writing was on the wall Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:03, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:15, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Your comment

I feel the comment you made here was inappropriate and could itself be considered an attack on others who have expressed concerns over some very unusual behaviour. I'm not really sure who you were referring to as "co." but I suggest you strike our your comment. Editors who expressed concern were on both "sides" of the AfD and included administrators and non-administrators alike. --Tothwolf (talk) 01:45, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Frankly, I'm appalled that you Bucket and others find it necessary to bite three new editors no more evidence than they were SPAs and continue to attack them after the AfD was over. I think that it is YOU and Bucket who should be striking your accusations of bad faith from ANI instead of me calling all of you on the carpet for it. —Farix (t | c) 02:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Frankly, I'm appalled that you continue to attack others just because you happen to disagree with them. My concerns were voiced in good faith and were put forth without "biting a newbie" or making a "bad faith accusation". I again suggest you strike out your comment. Given your above reply it really does seem as though you meant that comment as an attack towards those who were attempting to voice their concerns. You also apparently overlooked that one of the accounts was created in 2006 [12] and only used for the first time in 2010 [13] when it initiated that AfD. That is not a brand new account nor the actions of a new editor and it does raise quite a number of red flags. --Tothwolf (talk) 03:50, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

You are the one that continues to accuse these three SPAs of being socks or meatpuppets even after the SPI case showed that there was no connection or no evidence of coordination between these editors. In the absents of such evidence, continuing to attack these editors is bad faith. Whether one account was created in 2006 is irrelevant. You are not simply voicing a concern, you are flat out attacking these editors and calling for their ban simply on the bases that they are SPAs who participated in an AfD. If you continue the attacks, I personally think you and the rest should be blocked for violating Wikipedia's WP:AGF policy. If you are not going to strike you accusation from the ANI, then you should just drop the matter entirely. —Farix (t | c) 11:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, TheFarix. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Message added 04:37, 7 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:37, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

AIV

I just thought you should know that you were reported to AIV a while ago. The request was declined, obviously, and here's the diff: [14] —Soap— 13:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Amusing report. I'm not sure what his/her problem is, though I did revert their placement of the {{coi}} tag on Anime and Manga, which were never explained on the article's talk pages. Given his/her previous edits to both articles, I would say that the editor is trying to pick a fight. —Farix (t | c) 17:32, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Asuka Langely Soryu to Asuka Soryu

i just did a google search check, and it appears that asuka is more commonly know with her middle name. Should i change the name of the article? i have it on the discussion section of it.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:30, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The article is currently under the title of Asuka Langley Soryu, which is correct and should be moved. The few times in which her last name is given, it has always been "Langley Soryu". —Farix (t | c) 20:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Listing DRVs

If we're listing DRVs on that page now, don't forget about Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 January 28. --Gwern (contribs) 22:36 1 February 2010 (GMT)

Kitty Media

Just wondering why you redirected the page without any work on a merger. Many users have put work into keeping that list up-to-date. Would not at the most (personally think it deserves its own page) a merger be in order?. Lostinlodos (talk) 18:49, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

There was nothing to merge at it was a list of redlinks. —Farix (t | c) 18:50, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Rainbow lists

I noticed that when you recently cleaned up Rainbow (manga) and its chapter list that you neglected to preserve the lists, even though they had useful information (ISBNs, which chapters are in what book, and dates). I've merged in the lists to the article and added some information from the Japanese Wikipedia article for the episode list. Hope this helps. --Malkinann (talk) 00:02, 31 May 2010 (UTC)