User talk:Megata Sanshiro

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] VGProj Category Edits

Hi! Just wanted to let you know I've taken notice of your edits so far concerning articles and categories about international game companies on the recent edits page and that its appreciated. I'm not a member of the VG project but its a topic of interest for me and its great to see somebody working on it. Keep up the great work and welcome! :) Shallon Michaels (talk) 17:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] VG companies of Scotland

why do you keep deleting this category?Andrew22k (talk) 17:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the category is too small to be pertinent. Besides, there is already Category:Software companies of Scotland (and Category:Video game companies of the United Kingdom). Megata Sanshiro (talk) 17:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

9 articles isn't small i suggest the United Kingdom category be split into 4 different categories.Andrew22k (talk) 14:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It's a good idea! I'll split the category then. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 16:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

Hello, Megata Sanshiro! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! - Master Bigode from SRK.o//(Talk) (Contribs) 14:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

[edit] Category split

Hi, I notice the above discussion, and would suggest that Category:Video game companies of the United Kingdom should not be split as it doesn't contain nearly enough entries to justify this. WP:CAT gives an example figure of 200 articles for splitting a category, and when there are only nine for Scotland and one for Wales there's nothing to be gained from the change. I believe the nationality of these companies should also be taken into consideration, which British or UK, rather than English, Scottish or Welsh. Cheres, Miremare 18:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree too but you should discuss this with User:Andrew22k as he disagrees (see #VG companies of Scotland). Megata Sanshiro (talk) 22:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

If you agree, it may be advisable to seek some concensus at WP:CFD or WT:VG rather than continue to change articles to the individual categories on the strength of one user's opinion. Cheers, Miremare 19:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X.

The IGN link is not spam. It is the official debut trailer. xenocidic (talk) 20:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas 2

Please provide edit summaries after making an edit to a page. Thanks! Neil the Cellist (talk) 15:58, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Repost of The Cheetahmen

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on The Cheetahmen, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because The Cheetahmen was previously deleted as a result of an articles for deletion (or another XfD)

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting The Cheetahmen, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 23:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recategorization of several categories

Why have you recategorized several categories including Category:Digital Illusions CE games, Category:Paradox Interactive games and Category:Starbreeze Studios games? If you don't have a very, very good reason I intend to revert your potentially unconstructive edits. Next time, please provide an edit summary. Thank you. --MrStalker ^(talk) 14:12, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi! I recategorized these article to Category:Video games developed in Sweden because I think the categories were too small (each had only about 4-10 articles). The parent category is now more populated this way. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 14:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

With all respect, I think that's a stupid reason. There's no minimum limit how many articles an category should hold as long as it is several. The articles will still be in the parent category via its sub-categories. I intend to revert your edits (when I have time). --MrStalker ^(talk) 21:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] When moving articles, like you did in the Zelda CD-I games article.

When moving pages, please remember to fix any double redirects. These can create slow, unpleasant experiences for the reader, waste server resources, and make the navigational structure of the site confusing. Thank you. Magiciandude (talk) 04:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] warnings

Please don't give me warnings. As an admin and editor since January 2006, I'm well aware of how Wikipedia works. Had you not been so quick on the trigger with warning me, you would see that what you reverted was actually a consensus merge and redirect of the article. So I'll ask you to pay more attention next time, and not to disrupt Wikipedia by giving meaningless warnings and reverting consensus decisions. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 07:44, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stop

Let me be very clear: do not revert the merger and redirect at Talk:The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past & Four Swords. This is the consensus decision of the article's editors as developed on the talk page. If you continue to revert this change, you may be blocked for disruptive editing. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 07:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I've warned you twice now to stop. I've blocked you for 24 hours. You do not make reverts like that without discussion on the talk page, especially after you've been told to stop. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 07:49, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated.

What the? It's crazy. I didn't do anything "quickly", I looked at the guidelines. I didn't revert anything. Judgesurreal777 blanked a talk page because the article was merged; I believe talk pages should not be blanked so I restored that talk page. Why do you say I went against a consensus merge? I didn't revert the merging of the article. My edit was on the talk page, not the article. I never edited that article. Please explain what I did wrong, because I don't see it. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 07:49, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Let me explain it to you. Gary King proposed that the The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past & Four Swords article be merged with the main The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past article since there was not enough information to differentiate the two. The merger was approved, and the page was redirected. The talk page was also redirected, which involves blanking all of the content except for a redirect tag. However, you've continually reverted that, which creates a situation where the article's talk page is in a different place than the article itself. I asked you to stop multiple times, and to note that this was a consensus decision on the talk page, and yet you continued to revert that. That's acting too quickly. Had you looked, you would have seen that we were not BLANKING the page, but we were REDIRECTING the page. When you merge an article you must merge its talk page also. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 07:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I have no problem unblocking you, if you can realize what it is that you were doing wrong, and can promise not to do it again. There ARE situation where it is ok to remove content on a talk page; redirecting is one of them. What is NOT ok is to edit war with people without discussion, and then leave them warnings, all without actually looking to see what you are doing. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 07:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree, I will stop doing it if it's an uncorrect practice. I simply didn't know it, and the lack of an edit summary and explanation confused me. There was only one small section on the talk page, but sometimes talk pages can be pretty long and I thought that they should be keeped for historical purpose. But if the common practice is to blank them, I'm okay with it. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 08:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I think this practice should be stated more clearly in the guidelines though. Perhaps this paragraph should be deleted in Wikipedia:Merge#Performing the merger:

"Also remember that almost all article pages have a talk page. To avoid losing quick access to that historical discussion, a link to the source page's talk-page should be placed at the top of the destination's talk-page, such as:

Article merged: See old talk-page here"

Megata Sanshiro (talk) 08:05, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

That's not for the page that is being redirected FROM, but for the page that is being redirected TO. You would put that stuff at the top of the page that is going to be the NEW page. In any event, I've unblocked you. My suggestion would be to wait until you are more familiar with Wikipedia before messing about with redirects and mergers. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 08:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I know, but the problem is why put a link to the redirected article's talk page if that talk page has been blanked/redirected like the article? In our example, the link would be "See old talk-page here" but it wouldn't work. (Please note that I just ask about a clarification about this paragraph; I am not arguing or trying to annoy you.) Megata Sanshiro (talk) 08:19, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Because when you click that link, at the top of the page, it will say "(Redirected from Talk:The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past & Four Swords)" and when you click that second link, it bypasses the redirect and takes you to the original page. You can then view the history with the history tab, and see everything before the redirect. The other reason is that people who go directly to the Link to the Past page, will not know there is another article redirected to it, so when they see that link at the top, they know they can view the history from the other page. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 08:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

PS, I'm going to sleep for the night, but if you have any questions leave them on my talk page. If for some reason you are still unable to edit (likely caught in an autoblock), please use the unblock template and someone will be around to unblock you shortly. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 08:40, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 08:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jennifer Capriati Tennis (The Tennis Tournament: Grandslam)

I reverted your edit, it is a Telenet game also. But the article should probably renamed to Jennifer Capriati Tennis. Game release data. Govvy (talk) 09:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I think these companies listed are the publishers, not the developers. It's written "Developer: System Sacom" above Release datae on the same page. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 09:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I know, I did write it, but Telenet is one of the publishers know, that's why I put it in that category. Govvy (talk) 09:51, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Well I intended the category to only encompass games developed by Telenet, so that it can be categorized in a bigger category, "Video games developed in Japan" (Telenet has published some games that were developed in America). Megata Sanshiro (talk) 09:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I assumed the category would be both developed and published games by Telenet. Govvy (talk) 10:14, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I've put a description on the category page so it's clearer. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 10:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ogame

please DO NOT troll wikipedia and edit every page you come to. not everyone speaks english as their first language and the external links are there as allowed by Wikipedia:EXTERNAL . if you feel those links should not be their post a message on the articles talk page. thanks. Anubis1055 (talk) 21:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry but just because you disagree doesn't mean it's trolling; trolling is defined in WP:TROLL and it totally doesn't apply here. I removed these links because of Wikipedia:External links#Non-English language content. As for editing every page I come to, what's wrong with it? Megata Sanshiro (talk) 21:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

you dont know the subject. and i read the first sentance of trolling and saw no need to proceed further. it fits like a glove. re added as its allowed by WP External. thanks. Anubis1055 (talk) 01:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I've opened a discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games. This being said, can I ask why you keep removing the Category:Video games developed in Germany from the article? Megata Sanshiro (talk) 07:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

i have never edited that page before. please check page history. also, a wiki admin reverted an edit removing said links in the ogame page for vandalism. check back about 2 months i think it was. also the discussion about the ogame page needs to be in the ogame discussion page.Anubis1055 (talk) 15:54, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nihon Falcom

Is a red link. Cheers. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Megata Sanshiro (talk) 21:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Super Mario Kart

External links: I originally had many of those links as citations back in 2006 and 2007 when I wrote most of the article that you now see, but they were removed because it constituted a game guide. I read the rules for external linking, and the links weren't intended to promote any site, but provide more information about the game. I can attempt to incorporate those links when expanding the article, but I'm afraid no mods or admins seem interested in topical aspects of the game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.129.80.89 (talk) 19:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Golden Sun

Because the ref didn't support your change, and it was grammatically incorrect. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 20:51, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dragon Warrior III edits

You said "sorry but these numbers reflect the date stated in the "accessdate" parameter; don't change them without changing the date (or vice versa) after you changed the scores of the review table I created. I put the scores exactly how they are represented by their individual sites; what did you mean by your edit? Chiefmartinez (talk) 03:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The score on GameSpot is determined (partly) by the scores given by users, and the one on GameRanking is an average calculated from various scores from other websites, so this means that they change with time. That's why there is an "accessdate" parameter in the Template:Cite web used in the refs. The GameSpot and GameRanking scores that currently appear in the table are those that were shown on these sites on accessdate=2008-04-11. The scores shown later (like today) can be different so if you want to update them please change the accessdate parameter too. It's just a technical stuff (but it's so that we don't have to update the information everyday). Megata Sanshiro (talk) 11:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay I see your point; I changed the scores without updating the accessdate. I just updated the article now so it reflects the current date and the game's current scores as of April 14, 2008. Chiefmartinez (talk) 01:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of Category:Sega games en masse

Time out! You are removing the category "Sega games" en masse from many sega articles, with little or no explanation. If you infact take issue with the category first discuss. If consensus still can't be reached you may want to take your concerns regarding the category to wp:Categories for discussion. Simply deciding the category shouldn't be there and removing it en masse is not the way to go about this. Thanks. AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 15:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The category is perfectly fine. I am simply replacing it with Category:Sega Technical Institute games, Category:Overworks games, Category:Sega Studio USA games, Category:Sonic Team games, Category:WOW Entertainment games, etc., when appropriate. This is because the Sega category is already categorized by these categories (same goes for Category:Video games developed in Japan or Category:Video games developed in the United States). I am not deleting the Sega category; it is still reachable via category links and is still ultimately there grouping all these articles together via subcategories. Cheers. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 15:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Your edits here [1] and here [2] - you've clearly removed the category altogether. You state "redundant category" when removing the category on that first edit, maybe you can explain this a little better, as you have also not been putting any information in your edit summaries. If the game is in fact a "sega game" why would it not reside on a top level category for such criteria? AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 15:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Please refrain from reverting my edits until we are at an understanding, thanks. AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 15:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Sega Studio USA (for instance) is a division of Sega; so when an article is categorized in Category:Sega Studio USA games, the Category:Sega games is implied both by logic and via the categorization of Category:Sega Studio USA games (click on the link, Sega games is a subcategory of Sega Studio USA games). This is a normal convention on Wikipedia, nothing controversial about it. For instance, Golden Gate Bridge is categorized in Category:Bridges in California, but not directly in Category:Bridges in the United States, since the former is included in the latter.

(edit conflict) And sorry about reverting your change quickly. I just thought it was cleared up. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 16:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. I think I've got it now. So the List of Sega games would serve the additional purpose of listing sega games on a top-level? Hopefully you can see why I reacted, considering the lack of an edit summary and the frequency of the edits made. It appeared that you were simply removing categories. AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 16:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Well I guess this is an example of why edit summaries are so important :) I will try to make more explicite edit summaries from now on. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 16:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for clearing that all up. AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 16:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Why did you do this: [3]. All the user did was organize the platforms. I'm pretty sure there is no set way to list the platforms. The previous version was fine, but his edit was fine as well. Seeing as there is no set way, why did you undo the edit? RobJ1981 (talk) 20:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

All his edits are motivated by a non-neutral point of view, as he has edited all these articles to have PlayStation 2 listed before the other consoles in the infoboxes. You're right, it technically doesn't change much, but I'm pretty sure this qualifies as disruptive behaviour (like replacing British English spelling with American English or vice versa, or replacing cover art images of a country by the cover art of another country). Megata Sanshiro (talk) 20:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand. I was just curious. Thanks for answering. RobJ1981 (talk) 04:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mobile Forces / Realtime Worlds

I did a major overhaul of Realtime Worlds and in my investigations, there was no mobile phone version of Mobile Forces, and it was just about finished as Rage Software was folding. I'm not quite sure if Realtime Worlds took up the reigns or if it was still released as Rage Software. But I really haven't been able to find much in the ways of accessable reliable sources tying RTW to Mobile Forces, except that most of the staff from Rage went over to RTW. Thoughts? xenocidic (talk) 20:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, I haven't actually searched... But if there's no reliable source stating RTW worked on Mobile Forces, I guess it would be best to remove the name from the game's infobox. Moreover, even if the RTW staff had moved to Rage Software, the game would still officially have been released as a Rage Software game, not RTW. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 20:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

That's kindof what I was thinking as well. All signs point to the game releasing under Rage Software even though they were in the process of folding. Thanks for your input. xenocidic (talk) 20:25, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ............

Whatever ............ Pekin Republican - April 16th, 2008 7:56 P.M. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pekin Republican (talk • contribs) 23:56, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wp:3RR

I'm not sure if you're aware of the above rule, but you recently broke it with your reverts here here and here. I'm not going to do anything about this, but please be aware that you can be indefinitely blocked for breaking this rule. --haha169 (talk) 05:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Over-specific Dance Dance Revolution categories

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia articles even if your ultimate intention is to fix them. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 12:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

In the case of the categories, segregating the regional releases of DDR games was far too specific to matter. The total list of articles put together are still less than a single page in the parent category. They were simply unneeded. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 19:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

If you make mistakes here don't worry about it, anything can be undone. Judging from the rest of your talk page a lot of stuff you did was viewed as disruptive though. The best thing to do is go to the Village Pump to ask questions, or the talk page of the Video games WikiProject and ask what people need help with. There's no law that says you need to know every rule and policy by heart in order to start contributing to Wikipedia, but just in case thumb through the Policy and Guidelines so that what you do in the future isn't mistaken for vandalism or bad edits. If you have a specific question abut anything feel free to ask me, I'll do my best to help out. Take care --AeronPrometheus (talk) 21:51, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Touch! Generations FT

Are there any articles you're interested in featuring in the TGFT? - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sega Studio USA games revision needed

Hello, I'm the user who wrote the Sega Studio USA article. I noticed you recently created an article that's called "Sega Studio USA games" Where you listed the games developed by that division. However, some of the games you listed are inaccurate. For example, Sonic Adventure should be changed to Sonic Adventure International. The original Sonic Adventure was developed in Japan, while Sonic Team US worked for 9 months on the international version. Also, Sonic Rivals 1 and 2 were only supervised by them. At the top of the page it says " Games developed by Sega Studio USA.......etc... " But since Sonic Rivals 1 and 2 are pretty much Sega Studio USA type games, you should at least write at the top of the page " Games developed or Supervised by Sega Studio USA......etc. " Thanks for your time :) --S200048 (talk) 17:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)s200048