See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.

CLASSICISTRANIERI HOME PAGE - YOUTUBE CHANNEL
Privacy Policy Cookie Policy Terms and Conditions
User talk:Ashnard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User talk:Ashnard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Discussions on this page may escalate into heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here. See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette.
Archive
Archives

February 2007-April 2007
April 2007-June 2007
June 2007-September 2007
September 2007-February 2008


Contents

[edit] Mana (series)

Thank you for your extensive notes, it has been really helpful. I have 3 questions for you on the candidacy page, and otherwise I think I've done all the other corrections. Thanks! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:24, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your Bias toward Ken

I didnt tell them what to vote. They were members of the previous discussion. I only asked for their opinion. The section referenced to Ken dispute is naturally bias toward exclusionist who will support your claim. A truly unbias method would be to make a section called how to improve this article what to remove and not and see if anyone mentions his removal. The very mentioning of the dispute is bias against his inclusion. 63.76.234.250 (talk) 14:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Metroid Prime

Your notes were very helpful, as always. I took care of them and left a question on the FAC. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Super Smash Bros. Melee

I know you asked the question of DHMO, but I'm going to go through a few things I think the article needs to go to FA. Firstly, I would expand in any area that differs from the prior or later games in the series (like a table with the characters, and indicating who was carried over to the game from the last, who wasn't, who was then sent on to the next etc). Likewise, how does the gameplay differ from the previous game and obviously the game play is very different on the wii, considering the wiimote. These are expansions I would make, but other than these, there're just a few little minor things, like removing the expansion option for the tracklisting of the soundtrack. It doesn't look any good, doesn't really save sapce and depending on the screen size one uses, it can made things look rather jumbled, so you're better off just listing it as a general content entry. If you address these matters, I'll happily give you support when you go to FA. --rm 'w avu 00:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, the other thing was the "disc one" thing on the soundtrack, since it's the only disc, it's kind of unnecessary. Also, given the volume of information to the left of each song, it may be wiser to implement a track listing table, akin to the ones listed on WP:ALBUM#Track listing, which uses Before_These_Crowded_Streets#Track_listing as an example. --rm 'w avu 00:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

A few things I've noted.

  • You often state "reviewers said" or "many reviews said" etc., yet in most cases you only give on example. The plural is incorrect and unjustified here. For instance;
    • "most reviewers expressed the game's multiplayer mode as a strong component of the game.[50]"
  • "The visuals gained a positive reaction, although Matt Casamassina thought that "some of the backgrounds lack the visual polish endowed upon the characters" when giving a second opinion about the game." - if you're saying they were mostly positive, start with a positive comment (in fact, say the positives first) and then go on to the counter-arguments
  • "Most of the critics have praised the game's orchestrated soundtrack" - keep the same tense throughout
  • I think you should wlink the publishers (IGN, GameSpy, etc.) in the prose
  • I think you should have a paragraph devoted to graphics and one devoted to sound, not the two in the same paragraph. And on that note, you can talk about one reviewer's comments in more than one area
  • "The basis of Melee's gameplay system is the battles..." - personally, I don't quite get this sentence. How can the battle be too frantic? (IMO) Keep in mind that I haven't played the game in ages and may not be able to remember much about it, but yeah...it just seems odd to describe a fast paced action based game as "frantic"...
  • "Despite the new features, reviews criticized Melee for a lack of originality and for being too similar to its predecessor, Super Smash Bros; Caleb Hale from GameCritics.com rated it as "every bit as good as its Nintendo 64 predecessor" - replace the semicolon with a full stop
  • "When considering Melee's gameplay, reviewers have questioned its status as a fighting game" - you'll need to elaborate more on this. The quote afterwards doesn't quite suffice, and I think this is a relatively major point (most people I know buy video games based on genre as much as anything else...). Why was it/wasn't it considered a fighting game, etc.?
  • "To date, Super Smash Bros Melee is the best selling GameCube game, with over six million copies sold worldwide." - this ref was accessed in 2006. Check if the statement is still accurate (there's a list of best selling video games which should have an up to date number/rank)
  • "The game also sold well in North America, where it sold 250,000 copies in nine days" - the also is odd here, especially since you didn't imply before that the sales weren't in NA
  • Refs 5 and 66 are the same
  • Refs 72 and 73 need publisher info. Also, do you think it's worth linking to them via an archive (webcitations.org for instance)? I dunno how long they keep those pages...
  • "IGN named it the third best" - IGN shouldn't be in italics
  • "while GameSpy chose it as fourth in a similar list" - any commentary (a la IGN)?

And wow. That is a lot...imagine if my GA reviews were this intense! Hope this helps, and tell me when you're at FAC. Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 01:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Ashnard, I'll work with you on this to get these changes implemented. --Coreycubed (talk) 01:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Ugh. I'm sorry, Ashnard, I didn't get a chance to help on ANY of this stuff. Listen, I owe you one so if you ever need help taking down a tasklist like this, drop me a line, I want to make good on this. --Coreycubed (talk) 13:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Not a problem just glad to help :) 204.52.215.128 (talk) 01:05, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rise of Nations: T&P FAC

I believe I have addressed or fixed all of your comments regarding Rise of Nations: Thrones and Patriots. Please respond your feeling of whether the changes were sufficient or not, or comment if you have any additional comments. Hello32020 (talk) 21:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, do you want to strike the comments you think have been addressed or fixed. Hello32020 (talk) 22:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I think it's usually the practice of the nominee do such a thing. I'll do it if you want, although it will have to be tomorrow as I'm going to sleep soon, and I need to look at the changes with fresh eyes. Well done for the changes, though. Ashnard Talk Contribs 22:40, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Striking Comments on FACs

Just to note when you wake up the guidlines on the top of the page say the person object should strike the comment and not the person nominating the article. "To withdraw the objection, strike it out (with <s> ... </s>) rather than removing it...Per talk page guidelines, nominators should not alter, strike, break up, or add graphics to comments from other editors..." So please consider striking the comments when you awaken. Thanks :) Hello32020 (talk) 01:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SSBM

Hi, thats OK. I don't mind there being a heated discussion on my talk page; it certainly won't be the first time lol. Also, I have advised that IP not add the info back in but we'll just have to be in wait-n-see mode for now. RC-0722 communicator/kills 18:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

That IP readded the info; so I removed it again. He reworded it better but it still was going against a clear consensus. RC-0722 communicator/kills 18:40, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Personally, I think the info does no harm but still, I don't think it really does anythingfor the article. RC-0722 communicator/kills 19:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I did not mean to wipe that out, I think Ken Hoang, a notable competitor sounds better that A notable competitor, Ken Hoang though. Up to you if you want to change it. 165.230.74.140 (talk) 20:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't really care too much. Whatever sounds better, I guess. Ashnard Talk Contribs 20:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Further fixing of RON T&P FAC

I believe I have addressed your further comments, please check to see if I have and/or add additional ones. Thanks. Hello32020 (talk) 23:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe I have fixed your further concerns. Hello32020 (talk) 22:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Your additional comments have been addressed. Hello32020 (talk) 00:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Super Smash Brothers

Thanks for being patient with the review process. I promise I have good intentions. Sometimes I think it would be preferably to give FAC feedback over a pint. :) --Laser brain (talk) 19:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Ashnard, the game guide on IGN as stated in its opening page is written by Fran, Peer, and Craig. They are Fran Mirabella III, Peer Schneider, and Craig Harris. Courtesy of digging a little bit through Google and their IGN blogs. I would advise digging through the references to dig up more authors for consistency's sake, as on first glance it is curious why reliable sources are lacking authors (general collaborations can be acredited to "xxx staff"). For example, the article's ref 79, "The Next action sport" lacks an author for a publication, but it is the fifth page of an article whose first page states it is written by Camille Dodero. Jappalang (talk) 22:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Okay. I appreciate this notice. I'll work hard to get these fixed, although I may not get them all done today. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 22:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
If the authors are named in the article, I believe they should be listed. One (the most prominent or heaviest contributor) in the author field, and the others in the co-author fields. I would recommend this for articles with three named authors or less (so the IGN guide should have all three listed), the reference looks "stuffed" if an entire listing of four or more specific authors are shown. In that event, a generic "xxx staff" would serve for the co-author field. For cases where no specific staff is named, the generic "xxx staff" should suffice in the author field. Jappalang (talk) 00:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Ashnard, after further reflection I have stricken my comments about reliable sources. I will respect consensus here. Jappalang does raise a good point though - I hope this work is possible within the scope of the FAC. --Laser brain (talk) 03:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Jappalang, I've fixed all of the refs now. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 13:16, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] For you

The VG Barnstar
For your work on Fire Emblem and Super Smash Bros. related stuff, and for helping other VG editors out. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 07:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

*huggles* dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 07:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Just a general note

Thank you for the nice comment. Happy editing! --Silver Edge (talk) 21:59, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Magazines#Official_Nintendo_Magazine

Hey...not sure exactly how to do this (email is prob. best for copyvio reasons) but could you hook me up with any of the stories here that relate to the Age of Empires series? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

If it isn't too much, any articles relevant to any games in the series (I did a Ctrl+F for "Age of" on the WP:VG/Magazines page and saw quite a few entires) would be what I'm ideally looking for... dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 05:17, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Oh, you're right, my bad. Go for it. Thanks, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 07:09, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thousand-Year Door

Hi. In this edit, a user changed the British English in the article to American English. Is that allowed? The Prince (talk) 00:53, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Your welcome. I write British English too, and I get quite annoyed when users change it to American English when British English is consistent in the article. The Prince (talk) 11:32, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door

In a recent edit, you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For subjects exclusively related to Britain (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. If it is an international topic, use the same form of English the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to the other, even if you don't normally use the version the article is written in. Respect other people's versions of English. They in turn should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. If you have any queries about all this, you can ask me on my talk page or you can visit the help desk. Thank you. The article (which was already well written) was in American English until you changed it a few weeks ago for no reason. Since you had no legit reason to change it, it will be changed back either later tonight or tomorrow (whenever I feel like getting around to it). TJ Spyke 22:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

But the game is Japanese, not American. Therefore American English shouldn't necessarily be used in this article. The Prince (talk) 22:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Please don't tenplate a regular. "The article (which was already well written) was in American English until you changed it". Excuse me, but I did actually write the majority of the article and took it to GA under BrE. There's no reason to change it. Ashnard Talk Contribs 22:42, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
While you did help improve the article, you were not the only major contributor. It was already a well written article, who knows if it could have been a GA (no one had nominated it before). I fail to see the reason you changed the spelling to begin with since it adds nothing to the article. TJ Spyke 23:41, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
TJ this probably isn't worth B-class, nevermind GA. I'm sorry if I'm offending the old contributors, but the article was very poor in its previous. Anyway, who are these other major contributors that you speak of? Ashnard Talk Contribs 07:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:VG Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar! Never in a million years would I imagine receiving one of these. Thank you very much. The Prince (talk) 19:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FA of Orange Box synthesis thingy.

You have utterly confused me with this bit on the TF2 reception sentence. I can't see what is wrong with it when the other four sections do something similar and no-one's said there's anything wrong with them. If that sentence wrongly represents its point how should it be worded? I've changed the sentence to read "Team Fortress 2 was very well received by both critics and consumers alike, with reviewers praising the unique art styling of the game.", but I get the feeling that that still doesn't satisfy what you are talking about. Can you help clarify this so I understand what you mean, ideally by writing an alternate to that wording that shows me what it should be. -- Sabre (talk) 16:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Ahh... so it was just the claim that "no-one else has done this before" rather than the "the game's been praised for having neat characters and graphics". Makes sense now. Thanks. -- Sabre (talk) 16:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the welcome!

Hi, thanks for posting on my userpage, I see from yours you're a Boro resident - I went to Teesside Uni many years ago! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darrek Attilla (talk • contribs) 11:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Spyro 3 FAC

I've expanded the 'sound' mention to two sentences about the score. I can understand why you would like more in the section, but I think I've exhausted the refs. I tried submitting requests at WP:VG/M to get copies of two reviews, but both the users appear to have gone AWOL. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 20:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

It's supposed to. Thanks for the review, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 21:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edge

I've emailed you a link to the review. Drop me a note to let me know that you got it ok. - X201 (talk)

Did you mean that message to sound as terse as it read? If you look at the page history for my discussion page you'll notice that someone else posted at exactly the same time as you did, hence you weren't flagged up as the last change and I missed your addition. Edge never accredits any interview to an individual. I'll dig the page numbers out for you. - X201 (talk) 11:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Page 89. - X201 (talk) 12:15, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] VG NewsLetter

[edit] I want to pick your braaaaiiiiiiinssssss...

Mmmm, bbbrraaaaaiiiinnssss...

Anyway, zombie aside, I'd like to ask you a favour. From my limited experience of articles at FAC, you seem to have a good knack for picking out precisely what needs to be done to an article in order for it to be classified as FA. Now, its been three years since StarCraft was promoted to FA, but it has since deprecated considerably. There's no way its FA quality now, I'm surprised its not been taken to FA review. However, they can be a lot of hassle, and I was hoping that you'd be so kind as to create a nice comprehensive list of what I would need to do to maintain its FA status, much like you've done for The Orange Box and Grim Fandango. I'd greatly appreciate it if you could find time to do this, as while I can see some obvious problems (lack of references for large segments, rather weak reception section), I don't have the eye for the precise details that make an FA. -- Sabre (talk) 19:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Ashnard! -- Sabre (talk) 19:48, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the review Ashnard, that nicely outlines what needs to be done. I'll put in a request at WP:VG for any assistance anyone may be willing to give me, as there's a heck of a lot there for just me to sort out. -- Sabre (talk) 20:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Alright, I've started the article from scratch as it just strikes me as much easier to throw it all away and start again with that many problems (approximately 60, and a lot of them more than simple wording or referencing). The draft is over at User:S@bre/StarCraft. I've so far dealt with the Gameplay and Story sections (not bad for a day's work). If you wouldn't mind, could you keep an eye on the article as I put it together, finding and pointing out any un-FA issues? Going from zero to FA in one swoop isn't going to be easy. The main problems I'm likely to run into are with the lead and reception sections, so I'd appreciate a hand with them if you can. -- Sabre (talk) 18:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I've essentially finished my rewrite, and I've shoved it out. Mind giving it another look over at StarCraft and doing another review? Hopefully any problems should be confined to prose and can be fixed in seconds. -- Sabre (talk) 12:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! -- Sabre (talk) 15:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for participation in Peer Review of The Orange Box

The Orange Box, an article that you recently commented on at Featured Article nomination, has been put up for peer review. Please can you take the time to re-examine the article for anything that you feel remains an issue. Should you have any comments or concerns, please can you add them to the discussion. It is hoped that once this peer review is complete that the article will be resubmitted for consideration as a featured article.

Many thanks for both your time and valuable input. --Gazimoff (talk) 15:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I've responsed to your peer review comments and hope I've addressed most of your concerns, but I have a few follow-up questions as well. Please can you take a look when you have a moment and let me know what you think. Many thanks! Gazimoff (talk) 14:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Sorry about this

Dude, don't worry it, there's only so much time in one day. Lately, I've been lacking off on a lot of things on Wikipedia because of my real life. There's no real rush to review the guide. Just do it when you have time. Go ahead and leave any comments you have on either my talk page or on the VG talk page discussion. (Guyinblack25 talk 20:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Age of Empires

Ping...huggles? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:34, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Marth

Is there any specific reason that was never merged or did the whole proposal just sort of drift away? If the latter is the case, it can probably just be redirected at any time (I still have my version in my sandbox if you want me to tweak it), as only anons complained during the discussion. TTN (talk) 21:41, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, it just sort of reached a stalemate and was forgotten about. I'm personally all for it, but am not sure about a redirect considering the opposition. Nobody's opposing arguments amounted to anything reasonable, though. User: Krator thought it was notable enough but gave no reasons and I expressed my objection. Ashnard Talk Contribs 21:46, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
You could just try redirecting it, and if it's only one or two anons reverting without summaries, it would just be fine to revert and ignore them. If any of them become vocal or an actual user jumps in, then some other method would probably have to be used, though. TTN (talk) 21:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
May I have a say on this. Just redirecting without warning is considered "malicious," and if I recall correctly, isn't that against the rules without at least contacting the users who contributed to the article? -- ZeroGiga (Contact) 15:57, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, who do you want to do it? I'd do it if you want, but would probably wait until next week because I'm really busy with coursework right now. However, if I am to do it, I'd probably try to instigate discussion and then wait for a few days, just to say "don't say I didn't try". Of course, if you want to handle that then I'm alright with that. To the above user, I am actually one of the major contributors. Nothing can be done with article at all—it has no prospects. Ashnard Talk Contribs 22:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


It seems like you've got people "tracking" you. If a discussion was to be started, then they may oppose the motion just to spite you, which may be a problem. That may have happened last time, beacuse barely anyone had posted on the talk page prior to that. Ashnard Talk Contribs 22:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Per the arbcom case, I can't even place merge tags until like August or September, so it would have to be you. I'm in no rush, so you can take whichever course of action you wish to take. That was just a suggestion on my part. If you want me to tweak that version I made at all, just drop me a message. TTN (talk) 22:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, that could pose a problem. I guess I'll have to communicate through email or something to avoid them from now on. TTN (talk) 22:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, I just want to tell you. Ever since the discussion, people are trying their hardest to find real world information as we speak. If I recall correctly, people even attempted to make it a good article nominee at some point. I suggest at least giving them more time to find some sources before redirecting. -- ZeroGiga (Contact) 18:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I tried to make it a Good Article, but failed because I couldn't find any out-of-universe information. There simply isn't any from what I can find. To TTN, I'll try to instigate discussion in a few weeks when I have more time to do it, and will merge if I don't find any reasonable opposition. I'll do the same for the anime because that's a no-hoper. Right, I'm off to sleep no....ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 22:18, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect, your attempts to make it a GA were a miserable failure as this is what the article looked like before it was recently reorganized. Just because you failed to get an ugly, badly written mess of an article an A grade doesn't take away its right to exist, especially now that it's presentable and worthy of being in an encyclopedia. - 4.154.235.159 (talk) 03:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
It was failed due to an absence of information that doesn't seem to exist in the public domain. If you can say that the current version of OR, POV, and trivia is better, then that's your opinion. If you feel like saying something similar gaian, don't come to this talk page. Ashnard Talk Contribs 07:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Whatever, my liege. I'm sorry for questioning your methods and will never do so again, because it is obvious to this humble "IP" now that your views and opinions far outweigh my own or anyone else's. Please continue with your grand agenda which isn't one-sided and is blatantly better for the future of all humankind, good sir. - 4.156.24.66 (talk) 16:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't know what your agenda is. If you have a problem, go to the article's talk page, and we'll talk about the article and not myself. Ashnard Talk Contribs 16:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AN notice

This section above with TTN is mentioned at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#TTN.2C_again.. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] An image

I haven't uploaded an image in a while, so can you look over Image:Mariocharacters.PNG to make sure it's correct? I don't really even know if it can actually be used because I had to take two screen shots from the website in order to create it. It's worth trying over a screen shot of the actual game, though. TTN (talk) 20:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, next question? Anything but images. I've never uploaded one. I just about know how to do the rationales and that is it. I'm sorry. On a side note. While you're here, do you know who that IP may be above on the Marth topic? I don't think I've spoken to them before but they seem to hate me. Yeah, but images are my weakness as just avoid any work with them. Ashnard Talk Contribs 21:07, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Eh, if it's screwed up, I'm sure someone will eventually tag it for deletion accordingly. It's definitely a current or past user for sure. I'm guessing current, as they won't bother with an account. TTN (talk) 21:10, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
I'd say it looks alright at a glance, but I don't know. It's strange, I'm getting weird IP's appearing on my talk page, and User: A Link to the Past calling me a "crappy editor" over at Talk: Super Smash Bros. Melee—I guess that's Wikipedia. I think, like me, you've ran to him before. Happy editing. Ashnard Talk Contribs 21:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SSB Series

Is the SSB task force going to go for featured topic if SSBB receives the bronze star?--CM (talk) 02:13, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Came here with the same question—you wanna work on Super Smash Brothers some time? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
See my response on Clyde's talk page. DHMO, I'd love to work with you, but I'm afraid I'm not contributing to any article until after my exams in late June. Of course, I can give you a bell when I'm ready, or you can go on without me. I was thinking about getting the series article to FA too, but they were iffy about removing the "recurring characters" section, so that's a non-starter. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 08:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The WPVG Newsletter (May 2008)

[edit] Figurative tongues and acerbic flowers

I since changed it to The Escapist's usually acerbically critical reviewer, Ben Croshaw, stated in his Zero Punctuation review that he couldn't think of any criticism for Portal, which has "some of the funniest pitch-black humor [he had] ever heard in a game" and concluded that it is "absolutely sublime from start to finish."

This is no longer figurative or flowery. I do not think it is NPOV anymore either. Does this work for you? If so, will you support promotion to FA? If you won't, will you stop being so picky? :oP I kid, I kid... clicketyclickyaketyyak 10:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

About the discussion of wavedashing... I just want to make sure you see this: we will not make a move to insert this information until you are finished your exams and have ample time to respond, Ashnard, because there is no deadline. Don't feel pressure to respond now. Do well on your exams and we'll have a finalised version of the proposed text ready for you to look over when you can afford to. I hate that frustrating feeling that you have to respond but at the same time you know you need to study. Don't worry; I will make sure it isn't added until you have your say, seeing as you're by far the top editor and no clear consensus has been reached. so don't stress out over this.clicketyclickyaketyyak 18:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the consideration. I'm not self-pitying or anything, but this is a stressful time for me as exams draw closer. I apologise for any incivility expressed during the dispute. Ashnard Talk Contribs 18:56, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Official Nintendo Magazine request

Hey, I was wondering if I could request the Space Invaders Extreme preview in issue 29 (May 2008) of the Official Nintendo Magazine. I understand you're currently preparing for some serious exams, so there's no real rush. Good luck on them. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:09, 10 May 2008 (UTC))

Thank you. I'll get them to you when I can find some spare time. Ashnard Talk Contribs 21:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
What timing, I was just finishing up some stuff to update Space Invaders in a few hours. Thanks. (Guyinblack25 talk 18:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC))

[edit] The WPVG Newsletter (June 2008)


aa - ab - af - ak - als - am - an - ang - ar - arc - as - ast - av - ay - az - ba - bar - bat_smg - bcl - be - be_x_old - bg - bh - bi - bm - bn - bo - bpy - br - bs - bug - bxr - ca - cbk_zam - cdo - ce - ceb - ch - cho - chr - chy - co - cr - crh - cs - csb - cu - cv - cy - da - de - diq - dsb - dv - dz - ee - el - eml - en - eo - es - et - eu - ext - fa - ff - fi - fiu_vro - fj - fo - fr - frp - fur - fy - ga - gan - gd - gl - glk - gn - got - gu - gv - ha - hak - haw - he - hi - hif - ho - hr - hsb - ht - hu - hy - hz - ia - id - ie - ig - ii - ik - ilo - io - is - it - iu - ja - jbo - jv - ka - kaa - kab - kg - ki - kj - kk - kl - km - kn - ko - kr - ks - ksh - ku - kv - kw - ky - la - lad - lb - lbe - lg - li - lij - lmo - ln - lo - lt - lv - map_bms - mdf - mg - mh - mi - mk - ml - mn - mo - mr - mt - mus - my - myv - mzn - na - nah - nap - nds - nds_nl - ne - new - ng - nl - nn - no - nov - nrm - nv - ny - oc - om - or - os - pa - pag - pam - pap - pdc - pi - pih - pl - pms - ps - pt - qu - quality - rm - rmy - rn - ro - roa_rup - roa_tara - ru - rw - sa - sah - sc - scn - sco - sd - se - sg - sh - si - simple - sk - sl - sm - sn - so - sr - srn - ss - st - stq - su - sv - sw - szl - ta - te - tet - tg - th - ti - tk - tl - tlh - tn - to - tpi - tr - ts - tt - tum - tw - ty - udm - ug - uk - ur - uz - ve - vec - vi - vls - vo - wa - war - wo - wuu - xal - xh - yi - yo - za - zea - zh - zh_classical - zh_min_nan - zh_yue - zu -