User talk:Tezero/archive10

Hey Tezero, you supported my Children of Mana FAC before it died due to lack of comments. It's back again; would you be willing to re-support? Thanks! --PresN 21:12, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sure, PresN. I won't lie - I'm on a downswing of activity from Wikipedia and will probably be going on Wikibreak before too long to attend to real-life concerns - but I can certainly put this on my to-do list. Tezero (talk) 21:56, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The 18th edition of Ethnologue just came out, and if we divide up our language articles among us, it won't take long to update them. I would appreciate it if you could help out, even if it's just a few articles (5,000 articles is a lot for just me), but I won't be insulted if you delete this request.

A largely complete list of articles to be updated is at Category:Language articles citing Ethnologue 17. The priority articles are in Category:Language articles with old Ethnologue 17 speaker data. These are the 10% that have population figures at least 25 years old.

Probably 90% of the time, Ethnologue has not changed their figures between the 17th and 18th editions, so all we need to do is change "e17" to "e18" in the reference (ref) field of the language info box. That will change the citation for the artcle to the current edition. Please put the data in the proper fields, or the info box will flag it as needing editorial review. The other relevant fields are "speakers" (the number of native speakers in all countries), "date" (the date of the reference or census that Ethnologue uses, not the date of Ethnologue!), and sometimes "speakers2". Our convention has been to enter e.g. "1990 census" when a census is used, as other data can be much older than the publication date. Sometimes a citation elsewhere in the article depends on the e17 entry, in which case you will need to change "name=e17" to "name=e18" in the reference tag (assuming the 18th edition still supports the cited claim).

Remember, we want the *total* number of native speakers, which is often not the first figure given by Ethnologue. Sometimes the data is too incompatible to add together (e.g. a figure from the 1950s for one country, and a figure from 2006 for another), in which case it should be presented that way. That's one use for the "speakers2" field. If you're not sure, just ask, or skip that article.

Data should not be displayed with more than two, or at most three, significant figures. Sometimes it should be rounded off to just one significant figure, e.g. when some of the component data used by Ethnologue has been approximated with one figure (200,000, 3 million, etc.) and the other data has greater precision. For example, a figure of 200,000 for one country and 4,230 for another is really just 200,000 in total, as the 4,230 is within the margin of rounding off in the 200,000. If you want to retain the spurious precision of the number in Ethnologue, you might want to use the {{sigfig}} template. (First parameter in this template is for the data, second is for the number of figures to round it off to.)

Dates will often need to be a range of all the country data in the Ethnologue article. When entering the date range, I often ignore dates from countries that have only a few percent of the population, as often 10% or so of the population isn't even separately listed by Ethnologue and so is undated anyway.

If Ethnologue does not provide a date for the bulk of the population, just enter "no date" in the date field. But if the population figure is undated, and hasn't changed between the 17th & 18th editions of Ethnologue, please leave the ref field set to "e17", and maybe add a comment to keep it so that other editors don't change it. In cases like this, the edition of Ethnologue that the data first appeared in may be our only indication of how old it is. We still cite the 14th edition in a couple dozen articles, so our readers can see that the data is getting old.

The articles in the categories linked above are over 90% of the job. There are probably also articles that do not currently cite Ethnologue, but which we might want to update with the 18th edition. I'll need to generate another category to capture those, probably after most of the Ethnologue 17 citations are taken care of.

Jump in at the WP:LANG talk page if you have any comments or concerns. Thanks for any help you can give!

— kwami (talk) 02:13, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

.

Can you join me to bring Afternoon upto FA..-The Herald ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 06:09, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Never thought I'd get a request like that. I'll help if you want, but we should get a peer review first, The Herald. What is it about this article that appeals to you? Tezero (talk) 14:18, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just surfing wikpedia yesterday afternoon to hit straight in the article. Found it already a GA and then thought to take it up to GA. Well written and comprehensive with human elements, it deserves the golden star. May be PR will be the first step, I think. -The Herald ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 07:11, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tezero. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Sonic Adventure 2 at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Good luck with FA and all the best, Miniapolis 15:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tezero! After your support at the last FA nomination for City of Angels (Thirty Seconds to Mars song), the article received a peer review and is a current featured article candidate. Would you like to comment at the current nomination? Your help would be very much appreciated.--Earthh (talk) 18:23, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, Earthh. I've been doing basically nothing but job applications, tax forms, and miscellaneous errands for the past week, so I'd love to take a break with something like that. I'll find time for it sometime tomorrow. Tezero (talk) 04:23, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:45, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Slim Shady is back. You ready to get back to work? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 15:29, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure am, Slim. (You're the real one, right? Stand up!) I can definitely spare some time for that, especially with the motivation that should be arriving later tonight. I did Reception a while ago; if you'd like, you can take Gameplay while I do the other, smaller sections, or vice versa. Good to have you back! Tezero (talk) 23:24, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It's me, unlike my weird doppelganger Jaguar696969, but they're blocked, so s/he won't be standing up any time soon. I'm not sure what motivated me to come back, but I've discovered that it's good to jump right in with the intent of bringing up various 90s games up to GA again. It sure is a good way to take my mind of things. Well done on your entry for the Main Page, is it Freedom Planet? I can see why that's good motivation for you. I have some free time tomorrow so I can handle any aspect of 3D Blast, probably starting with the gameplay section like you suggested. Would this make it the last of the major Sonic games for the Genesis that's up to GA? Anyway, I think it's great to be back ☠ Jaguar ☠ 23:55, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom Planet? Not quite. Anyway, yeah, 3D Blast would be the last of the Genesis platformers, though "major" can be taken however you like. Let me take a crack at the small sections now. Tezero (talk) 17:59, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sonic X? Well done - I saw it yesterday. I aim to get Jumping Flash! on the Main Page one day, that will be a dream come true. I'm at work at the moment but when I get back I'll do everything I can with 3D Blast. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 08:04, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How have you been? I think 3D Blast is practically GA ready although I haven't touched it for a week - I've been busy with promoting some GAs throughout this fortnight. I'll brush it up tomorrow and once you're ready I think it should be ready to go... ☠ Jaguar ☠ 22:38, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sonic X, precious again --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:33, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by that, Genda Arendt? Tezero (talk) 18:00, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I usually tell people who wrote today's features article (TFA) that they are precious, - but only once ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:11, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Big the Cat fishing.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 11:33, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Is it okay for me to create the "Five Nights at Freddy's" category for the three Five Nights at Freddy's game articles? Thanks! --Gjlewis (talk) 14:07, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, Gjlewis, especially because there could probably be an article for the series or a list of the characters, but why ask me? Tezero (talk) 14:15, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Um because I just don't want to break one of the rules by creating a new category without the admin's permission. Gjlewis (talk) 14:17, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm TJRC. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Buzz Aldrin, but you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. TJRC (talk) 01:08, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

TJRC, forgive me, but wasn't that included in the source? I mean, the name of the publication was Bipolar, too. If that source isn't sufficient, I was able to pull up several more effortlessly that attribute some of Aldrin's behaviors to the disorder.

Having said that, this isn't the first time my (sourced) edits about a celebrity being bipolar have been reverted - on Robin Williams' page, for example, it took only a few minutes and was done with no explanation, even though I thought that was pretty public knowledge. I don't know what it is about this condition in particular that causes such sensitivity... Tezero (talk) 03:15, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The website is named "Bipolar"; but that's just the title. When you actually read the text on the website you will see it says "Buzz Aldrin, Ph.D. (Colonel, USAF, Ret.) - Not Really Bipolar" and "The name of Buzz Aldrin appears on one list after another of celebrities with bipolar disorder. However, in reviewing actual interviews and biographies on the topic of his struggles with mental illness, Buzz only specifically addresses depression and alcoholism." In other words, nothing on that page indicates he is bipolar; it says exactly the opposite.

I don't think there's anything about the condition that causes sensitivity, beyond the usual sensitivity about making claims about an individual with no source to support it.

You just can't write on Wikipedia about people with such disregard for accuracy; especially living people.

And before you go "effortlessly" pulling up other sources that label him as bipolar, please make certain that they are reliable sources. Aldrin's self-identification as bipolar would be acceptable, as would a physician who has examined him and publicly written his conclusions. Mere speculation but someone who has not qualifiedly medically examined him would not be acceptable. TJRC (talk) 03:59, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I stand corrected. Now that you mention it, I have seen other people's similar edits appear and disappear the same way, so perhaps the word about special reliability for conditions like that ought to be better broadcast. Oh, well. Tezero (talk) 04:03, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, above, I pointed you to WP:Biographies of living persons, above; and when you edited the Aldrin article, you were presented with the message:

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, please see this page.

I'm not sure how much more prominent you want it to be. TJRC (talk) 04:22, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I know. I'm just used to those messages to the point that I don't notice them anymore, and I didn't have my head screwed on tightly enough to consider whether what I was adding would be challenged, assuming it were true. I don't see why it's necessarily scandalous, considering that the article already said he had depression and there are lots of contextually reliable sources that describe some of his bipolar-like behaviors independent of medical experts asserting the actual condition, but then that's why rules need interpretation, I suppose. I will resolve to be more careful about such details in the future, but in the meantime I think we can drop this. Tezero (talk) 19:35, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Green Hill Generations.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 23:33, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Freedom Planet. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:39, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

--Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:39, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've seen you frequently around the article Linkin Park and other related articles. Please consider joining the Linkin Park WikiProject, an effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage and detail regarding Linkin Park. {{Portal|Linkin Park}} If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks that you can help with. Thank you for your time.

Please come! Mike:Golu · ^{[ Confidential message ]} 10:24, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	For having a good editing philosophy and participating well in discussions. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 03:28, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm been meaning for a while to thank you for taking over the Uzumaki GAN review after Lucia got topic-banned. You didn't have to, but you did anyway, and I really appreciated it. Thank you! Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 18:39, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Remember me from those debates on the redirection of Sonic character articles last year? Well, I'm starting to edit video game articles a bit more again. I see you even managed to get Tony Hawk's Underground to FA. I'm thinking of doing some work on Tony Hawk's Underground 2 myself, as it my favorite Tony Hawk game. Maybe we should at least get that one to GA?

By the way, I have not tried Pro Skater 5 yet, but despite the low scores its getting, I want to. Have you played it yet? Kokoro20 (talk) 02:09, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:55, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:LegoStarWarsIILukeAndR2D2.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:37, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]