User talk:Axem Titanium/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Axem Titanium. 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.

They're generally considered not reliable because you don't know who's claiming to be a trustworthy source. This board is linked from Atlus' site, and VyersLives is an administrator at the site. Was the only active admin. So it's easy to say that he's an employee for Atlus. --Raijinili 20:09, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

We know that VyersLives is an employee of Atlus, and thus he's a first-person source. The first rule about knowing is because of people CLAIMING to be "in the know". Are you denying that he's an employee? The second rule doesn't apply to first-person sources (which should be obvious). You would have to claim that he's not a first-person source. --Raijinili 21:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Can SOMEONE explain to me why a game that's already sent out final copies is still considered to be "under development"? --Raijinili 04:18, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I made two posts. Look up. Also, you reverted my removal of the "Future Game" template, so I assumed you had a reason. --Raijinili 04:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

You still haven't responded to me about this, and yet you reverted another edit on the matter. --Raijinili 17:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I'm just here concerning your stance on spoilers in your Userboxes section. While I agree with you that spoilers are not needed in a section that clearly talks about plot and so on... I'm not sure if I'd call it a form of censorship. I'd personally call it being redundant as a section on plot implies in itself that it will be about the plot, therefore anyone who does not want to have the story spoiled for them should direct their attention elsewhere.--Kuribo 19:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I was just wondering about that too, if "Wikipedia is not censored" is an argument for removing spoiler warnings (tags or something), why is there such a tag (or something) at all? If it's censorship, wouldn't it always be? Ville V. Kokko 08:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

The templates are user-made. The templates are controversial too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raijinili (talk • contribs)

I agree with your reverting the Clan Report, my version was just to add more in-game information for the US version. I don't agree with your revert to the renaming wars dialogue. I had added that back before an official instruction manual or strat guide was released, and people were constantly changing player names. Now that there are official documents, I believe that section that I originally added is not necessary. --WW79 14:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

		The Editor's Barnstar
		This is for purging the external links from Criticism of Noam Chomsky. Combing through all those links looked like an impossible task. Why didn't I think of the blunt axe approach? Thanks for this and your other contributions. JonHarder 22:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't realize this until I looked at some of those links you just provided. The beginning of the article still listed it as Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII instead of Crisis Core -Final Fantasy VII-. I fixed this. semper fi — Moe 18:18, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't even notice it until ryan-d pointed it out in a dispute...Anyway, thanks for reverting the vandalism inserted in my comment here. I appreciate it! :) —Mirlen 01:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh well, I made the cookie you know. :P Just kidding — not that you didn't know that of course. Anyway, do I have the jist of at least the first part of the philosophy?

If I wish to eat cookies, then I must do good deeds in Wikipedia.

Well, you know that they say (from one fellow musician — violinist, in this case — to another): Every Good Boy Deserves Fudge. ;) —Mirlen 02:02, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I stand corrected. :) —Mirlen 03:36, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello,

You keep removing ffxii.us and ff12-europe.com and instead post up a poor fansite (final-fantasy-12.net). You tell others to quit adding fansites, yet you keep doing so yourself. Also, you or someone else removed ffxii.us when it shouldn't have been done in the first place--it was already approved/posted as an external link for over a year now! Please quit removing it when there is no reason to do so.

Thanks. Pikachu123 02:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with promoting a site more than contributing to the article (the two sites aren't even mine). What it has to do with is the fact that after a year+ of being an external link, you and a couple others suddenly think it's just "ok" to go ahead and remove it.

Pikachu123 02:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

You may not feel they are helpful, but that is your opinion. I, for one, think that both sites are. They have weapon charts, lyrics, maps, locations, media, etc. That stuff is not on the Wiki article for the game and thus, the sites are helpful. Besides, who are you to take it upon yourself to overturn what was already decided as helpful by the Wiki community? Do you have nothing better to do? Honestly? Threaten if you wish, but they mean nothing.

Pikachu123 05:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Why make another topic about it in the Talk/Discussion area when it was already done and approved in the past? Nothing has changed. You may think they are no longer useful, but what about the things I mentioned to you in my last message? You honestly don't find those things helpful/nice to have readily available? Come on, now.

Pikachu123 15:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

There's no need to protect the article especially that there's only one vandal to whom i've just given the last warning on introducing factual errors. I also referenced the material you added. I'll be watching the article and deal w/ the vandal in case he returns to his ways. -- Szvest ^{Wiki me up ®} 09:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I was just wondering why Final Fantasy XIII and Versus XIII aren't on the links thing at the bottom of the Final Fantasy pages anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.128.249 (talk • contribs)

Actually I just don't like the new thing at all, it was better when it was big, this is just too small with not enough links to other games or shows and other things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.128.249 (talk • contribs)

Well you seem to deal a lot with the Final Fantasy games so I thought maybe you would know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.128.249 (talk • contribs)

Oh, well if I wanted to fix that who would I send a complaint to? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.128.249 (talk • contribs)

It is not link spam. Fire Emblem World is indeed an extremely informative site on the issue of Fire Emblem. It is also a massive community and a larger site than any other Fire Emblem site. I am in no way an owner of the site and neither are all the other people who want to see it on the external links. It is just an excellent site and is what people are looking for when they check the external links of Wikipedia.

As for member "Thunk", he is a disgruntled ex-member who was banned from the site for excessive bad behavior. He wants to see it taken off out of spite, nothing more.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.123.32.123 (talk • contribs)

Yes. Indeed. Fire Emblem World has larger forums, a game, and other features that the Documentary does not. So your point is invalid, and you are, in fact, vandilising whenever you remove it from the list of external links. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.123.32.123 (talk • contribs)

I have given other reasons as well. Game and various other features. The reason I'm still talking here is because you act as if you're the authority here. You're not. Your continuous deletion is vandalism. This is a warning for you to stop. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.123.32.123 (talk • contribs)

You have no significance whatsoever. Your opinion and the opinon of another member with a pathetic grudge don't matter. Especially when this link has been added by six different people in the past. Your opinions on a useful site are hardly important at all as it is. But when six other people disagree, then you should quiet yourself and stop removing it. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.123.32.123 (talk • contribs)

Not redundant; not all lists are redudant to their categories. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

That article shouldn't even be separate. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the tip about Riviera. In fact, i am writing the revised main article on Word before copy-pasting it. It should take a few day (Hope I can fend off deletionists till then). WoodElf 06:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey... umm... I was just wondering why you redirected the Keyblade article to the Kingdom Hearts article. It took me a good long while to write it (especially since I'm not an English native speaker) and I kind of liked it the way it was. Personally I didn't think that it is superfluous at all. Wouldn't it work as well if you just made a link to the Kingdom Hearts article in a related article section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sythiar (talk • contribs)

I'm not too familiar with all the stuff on Wikipedia, so that was a big help. Again, thanks! Comrade Pajitnov 16:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

See this and please message me.

WoodElf 16:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry if my words seemed harsh. I did not mean to offend anyone. Infact even though I might be a dim-witted newbie, I did look at the history - but failed to grasp its meaning. Thank you for pointing it out to me so kindly. I will be more considerate when I write up a new article. Live and learn, as they say... - Sythiar 01:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

No longer redundant. See here. - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I ask - why must the list not be separated from the article? The list takes up far too much space on the article. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for you interest in LoPbN. However, among all the principles of its construction, perhaps the most fundamental is that the list is "chartered" as a list of biographies of real people. While there are borderline cases because of uncertainty (Old King Cole comes to mind), virtually all fictional characters are clearly distinguishable from historical ones, even where romans a clef are concerned. I've occasionally expressed opinions on lk'g from articles on surnames to pages in the LoPbN tree (or more often sections of them), but for this purpose, my position is simply to maintain the status quo on Hamilton and let others work out the details of what belongs there and where, other than LoPbN the rest should go. Thus i'm reverting both the relevant edits to those to pages. Hope something else works out.
--Jerzy•t 05:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
We seem united in ignorance [smile]. But i got the impression there was a formal or informal project for articles on surnames, and you'd probably have a more fruitful discussion its participants. I'd suggest looking at the talk pages of templates and categories that Hamilton is tagged with, and using the histories of articles carrying relevant tags to find recurring usernames and editors who added or refined those tags. Same with the {{Hndis}} tag, and with contributors to relevant sections of WP:MOSDAB's talk page. (Ask me a question if you don't know what i mean or how to do those things.)
--Jerzy•t 20:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Good catch! I should have tried rather more alternative spellings. Thanks, Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Please consider the point illustrated in the below link. The screenshot (your purported reason for moving the article) is about the only occurrence of the misspelling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:M.U.G.E.N.#Moving_back_to_M.U.G.E.N_the_crappy_sequel. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Messatsu (talk • contribs) 00:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC).