User talk:SoM

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Jump to: navigation, search
Reply at the BOTTOM of the page.
"I am giving you this barnstar to let you know that I too feel your Wikistress. Take care, D. J. Bracey"
"I am giving you this barnstar to let you know that I too feel your Wikistress. Take care, D. J. Bracey"



Contents

Wikipedia:Infobox standardisation

I know you like infoboxes and have created a few, so when I ran into this I thought it might interest you? Steve block talk 17:08, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Fair use tags

Okay, I'm having a bash now. I just want to clarify where you said:

(bearing in mind that you shouldn't just retag without checking that it's not excessively high-res and that it sources both the comic the panel(s) come from and the place the scan came from, even if the uploader scanned it themself aren't all okay).

What sort of thing I should be looking out for. What bit might not be okay? Steve block talk 13:35, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I've asked User talk:DrBat about Image:2765 400x600.jpg. Also, how do I know what resolution the image is? Is that the file size? Steve block talk 15:16, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
  • And the thought just came to me - we should really be demanding some sort of "The characters/etc depicted are trademarked and copyrighted by DC/Marvel Comics" notice, shouldn't we? I've been making a point of doing so on my uploads (e.g. Image:X-Factor (2005) 1.jpg), but it'd be a good idea in general to be safe
Could we not create some templates for these copyright messages? I agree they are a good idea. Steve block talk 15:45, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Comic panels

Aren't comic panels okay to use if they only show the character? T-1000 17:12, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I have added sources for the pics. Sorry for the inconvience. T-1000 20:09, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I have added the Issues for the pics. T-1000 18:26, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Problem Reverts on Large Numbers of Characters

User Apostrophe is taking it upon himself to remove almost ALL major Marvel Supervillains (Doctor Doom, Sabretooth, Kingpin) who appear consistantly in multiple titles from the Marvel Supervillains category. First he started with a few and when I reverted what he did he got angry and REMOVED just about all of them and started new categories. In and of itself his new categories is not a bad idea and some of the existing categories were unnecessary, but at this point what he is doing I would classify as vandalism and I am in the process of reporting it as such. I have warned him one time and would appreciate some back up. ScifiterX 21:38, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Trading Cards

I have removed the Trading Cards from the entries.T-1000 01:32, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Also, why does Kaine need clean up?

Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/exemplars

I worked up ideas on how to structure comics related articles from the previous discussions and placed them at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/exemplars. I also copied relevant discussion to the talk page. Please feel free to comment and amend. Steve block talk 23:05, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

User:SoM/Comicswikiportal

So browsing Category:Wikiportals to see how it's done, I saw User:SoM/Comicswikiportal. Alright to make that the base and then move it when done? All the subpages just get fleshed out I guess? Steve block talk 18:37, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Sure, if you want (although I didn't get very far. I started, then I noticed that whoever opened it is considered the "owner" and thus obliged to keep it going/up to date. And I tend to let these things slip.)
Ah. I've walked into this one alright then :) . It's bad enough keeping British and Irish current events up to date. Steve block talk 18:57, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Mega Morphs

Mega Morphs isn't a team. It thought is was. Sorry for the mistake. It was a mistake right?

Portal vs. Wikiportal


  1. Eh? What's going on with the categories there? Why is it in Category:Portals (16 pages + 3 subcats) rather than Category:Wikiportals (104 + 8)
I'm not sure, I haven't looked too much at the cats yet. Best bet is to dual cat it then.
  1. I can see the point of reformatting the WP:CMC main page, and even like the columns in a way, but Template:Wikiproject's got a "How-a-WP-should look" template. And you missed at least one "cricket" :)
I knew I'd miss one cricket. I think I address the other point at WP:CMC talk.
  1. Lilac? Is that compulsory, or did you choose it?
I chose it. Again, see WP:CMC talk. Steve block talk 17:22, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm

Seems like we disagree on the layout drastically. I'm not too keen on the top section going right across the page to be honest, I find it uninviting, and I like the addition of the text on the featured picture, it gives a little more context and increases click through if you ask me. Steve block talk 04:32, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Layout dispute

I'm not sure how we resolve this to be honest. Steve block talk 19:15, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Okay, I've had another tinker. The lilac is back, although note quite a few portals use lilac, although I've kept the layout. I captioned the picture, if we're including small text then that to me is the way to do it. I've rearranged the items and added a things you can do section. I've made another couple of changes, made the opening comics big and also expanded the text on the To Do section to balance the page, but they aren't coming through yet, I don't know if there's a server issue there or not. Still, see what you think and where we can get to. I figure you and me are going to be doing the most work on updating it, so we might as well get to something we can both live with. As to updating it, how do you reckon we should choose the content for it? Nominate and vote, like on collaboration candidates?
  • And on another topic, shall we have a bash at the to do list at WP:CMC? I think for starters it shouldn't be on it's talk page, so I'll sort that out. Most of it is pretty near done, I reckon, how about you? Steve block talk 13:03, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Spiderman

Hah, I've never bought an issue of Spiderman in my life. As to the commas, well, it takes a long time to set this stuff up to your satisfaction. Bet you wish you'd done it yourself now, eh? :) Just wish the servers weren't so damn slow. That blanking is from an edit about half an hour ago that hasn't been purged. I have half a mind to ditch the transcluding. Steve block talk 21:27, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Things you can do

That's a neat trick at Portal:Comics/Things you can do, I have to say I thought that was frowned upon which was why I didn't try it, but I can't say I mind. It makes it easier to keep it updated, that's for sure. Steve block talk 21:32, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Lilac

Good golly, you really don't like it do you? More portals use t than don't, so what have you got against it? The only reason I'm avoiding white as a background is that putting a thumb on an image, as in the Eisner one, creates some siully blue shadow on it. Also, do you know how to solve the text disappearing under the image in the top box? Steve block talk 22:01, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

That works

Yep, I'm happy. You? Well done on the fix in the intro. The blue shadow appeared around an image when the thumb tag was applied, or at least it did my end. Also, I don't think we should update the featured articles and pictures too often, what, once a week? Steve block talk 21:29, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

To do list

(1) isn't getting any attention, and hasn't for a while

  • I don't mind having a quick bash at this, but it's simply just listing all the topics somehow isn't it? I don't understand Leigh's point or purpose here. Steve block talk 14:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

(2) hasn't had any attention

  • I was actually going to tackle this next. The problem I have with it is which Superhero characters to list. My thinking was the main ones, Superman, Spider-Man, Batman, Wonder Woman, X-Men. Steve block talk 14:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
    • I thought he meant something like Articles related to Formula One at Formula One. But that's what you thought he meant by numner 1, isn't it? We could just get rid of these two too, then. Steve block talk 23:07, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

(3) as phrased, it's unachievable for the simple reason that there'll always be new stubs generated

  • Agreed. Shall we remove it or debate its removal? Steve block talk 14:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
I don't know about that - a weakening of the phrasing is needed, and direct mention of the subcats might be an idea, but not outright removal.
  • Sounds good. I'll leave that one to you. :) Steve block talk 23:07, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

(4.1) - how many publishers are there? Enough to really warrant a specialised infobox, rather than finding some business Wikiproject's and "borrowing" it?

  • Sounds good. Template:Infobox Company? I would suggest removing the products and industry, but then again, those would be useful to readers not familiar with the publisher in any shape or form, wouldn't it? Steve block talk 14:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
Yeah. Other than a possible case for listing their more prominent characters (which could be done as an adjunct box), they're fundamentally businesses and should be treated as such.
  • Right. Best mention that at WPT:WPCMC and I'll let you do the adjunct box. I haven't worked out infobox coding yet, it's all straight lines to me. :) Steve block talk 23:07, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

(4.2) There was a crack at this, but while it was a poor attempt, it did make me wonder how useful it would be, since most articles are character/team orienated, rather than series

  • Should we start building pages for the comic book series as has been suggested at Steve block talk 14:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
Maybe - I'm of two minds on this after me and another guy had a recent edit war at New Avengers with a guy who refuses to admit that the team is still just the "Avengers". I've got a sinking feeling that an attempt at comic-series articles might turn into pseudo-character/team entries anyway

(4.3) There's a bias towards superheroes (and I freely admit I'm biased that way), so that's down the list

  • No problem. Although I've softened my stance on infoboxes, I'm not going to take a lead on making them or using them. I see that as your department, if you will. :) Steve block talk 14:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

(4.4) I know there are very few articles on CB artifacts, and I'm not sure how useful it would be to make more articles. Best to keep them with the relevant characters for the most part.

  • Again, I agree, and suggest removing it, or debating the removal. Steve block talk 14:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

(5) Mentioned already recently - might be some progress there.

(6) Is... blank. Or near enough.

  • Yeah, not sure what the goal is with that one. Not much comics content, as opposed to webcomics stuff, gets deleted on AFD. I think the idea is to shift the cruftier stuff over there, but don't look at me to set that one up. ;) Steve block talk 14:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Black Cat image

Why did you tag Image:Black Cat.jpg with a no source tag? It says in the describtion that it's the cover of the Marvel Must Haves: Spider-Man/Black Cat: The Evil That Men Do #1-3 and has a proper fair use tag. I don't this Wiki requires anything else... --Fritz Saalfeld 09:38, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

You need to say where you got the scan, like crediting the photographer who photographs a famous-yet-copyrighted picture (and subst {{Marvel-Comics-trademark-copyright}} while you're at it. - SoM 12:28, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
I thought (and still think) giving the issue the image is taken from and the artist would be enough... (isn't listing the artist the same as crediting a photographer?!)--Fritz Saalfeld 13:08, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
No, because if you upload a picture of the Mona Lisa, you're not going to credit the photog and not Leonardo DiVinci. I'm trying to get everyone to play safe on these things. BSTS.
Okay, I see.
And I checked - the Newsarama copy of that image doesn't match the copy you've uploaded (it being 458×686px @ 488.26kB, whereas the copy you uploaded is 400×595 @ 87.18kB). Don't add a source just to fob me off. - SoM 14:05, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm not trying to annoy you, I just resized the image after downloading it from Newsarama because I didn't want to upload such a large file. Also - legally - I don't get why the source of a scan has to be given. Could you explain that? --Fritz Saalfeld 14:18, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

"you can't vote for your own move request"

You said this at Talk:Lost (2004 television series). If it's true, I apologize: but then, why does the Wikipedia:Requested moves page have this on it, under "copying the following is suggested"?

==Requested move==

The reasons for move copied from the entry on the [[WP:RM]] page
----
:''Add *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''' followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>''

===Discussion===
:''Add any additional comments''

Did I misunderstand the part that said, "Add Support or Oppose"? Was I supposed to put that text in, instead of adding Support or Oppose myself? If so, the page ought to be clearer.

I'm honestly confused here. —Josiah Rowe 18:13, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, you're meant to add that text rather than vote yourself - by nominating to move, you've made your vote clear, and by adding a Support below, you're effectively voting a second time. --SoM
Ah. Perhaps WP:RM ought to say that. Should I remove my vote on the "Lost" page? —Josiah Rowe 18:33, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Jean Loring

I'm thinking of making a SHB box for Jean Loring. Do you think she should have a Villain box or a Supporting Character box?

Comics Collaboration of the Fortnight

Forgive the standard message, everyone listed as a participant is getting one. I thought it might boost activity at the project. Whilst doing this, I thought about maybe doing a welcome for each new project member with a link to the collaboration template and the to template. Any thoughts?

As a member of WikiProject Comics, I thought you might be interested in the Comics Collaboration of the Fortnight we have set up. Please feel free to vote on the articles listed, although bear in mind that a vote for a particular article means you are pledging to help improve the article. The goal of the collaboration is to improve articles to Featured Article status, as we feel Comics is under-represented in that area. Thanks for your help. Steve block talk 15:57, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Polaris

The replacement may be older, but I still think presenting an attractive-looking image should take precedence over when something happened to be drawn. I'll leave the current Larroca one up for the time being, but if you really want a modern image, I request that you at least find a suitable replacement within a day or so. The current image is off-putting and dull; there was a better one up previously. Perhaps that can come back. -- James26 19:16, 19 September 2005

Polaris discussion

I obviously have a similar dislike for the current pic (as for appropriateness, the way she's currently being portrayed is not strictly sad, so I'd have to disagree to some extent). All right, let's reach a middle ground and go with the 166. -- James26 22:29, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

X-Men collaboration

Hi. You voted at the Comics Collaboration of the Fortnight for X-Men which has become the current collaboration. Please help to improve it in any way you can. --Steve block talk 10:41, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Spider-Women

In cases where multiple superheroes have the same name, their articles just have their name. For example, the various Green Lanterns and Robins; the Hal Jordan article is Hal Jordan, not Green Lantern (Hal Jordan). And the Tim Drake article is Tim Drake, not Robin (Tim Drake). Should we do the same for the Spider-Women articles? And should the main article have a minor summary of the characters, like the main articles of Robin and Green Lantern do? --DrBat 00:41, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

UK-depot-stub SfD

When you'd listed that stub for renaming, you hadn't marked the template with {{sfd-t}}, or added it to {{sfd-current}} (which are what procedures call for). I've done so now; just thought I'd let you know about it tho. --Mairi 05:57, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Public school

Hi. Heads-up re vote on name change at public school. A couple of us have switched our vote to back the new consensus: a merge with Independent school. I wondered if you would consider reviewing that Talk page and maybe switching support too, so that we can wrap this debate up and move on to improving new article?--Mais oui! 06:43, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

2005 USA-Race

DNS stands for when a car does not take a a race start. Makes sense. By having Ret listed that mean the driver has actually started in that race and will count a race starts towards the driver race start tally.. The formation lap does not count as a lap at all as it is not added towards the race classification. For when does a driver 'start' a Grand Prix? To my mind he does so only if he is on the grid when the flag drops or light goes green at the final start. Should a driver have failed to compete the formation lap, for instance (as was the case with Prost at Imola in 1991), he cannot truly be said to have started the race. In the case of restarted events such as the British GP in 1986, poor Jacques Laffite certainly did start the race, but this was declared null and void and he was not presented to take the restart, which is the only one that counts. For true official race results is best to get them off www.forix.com as they receive their race results from the officials. Yes I know formula1.com is official but not 100% official in statistics. If you decide to leave it as Ret then you must give all the drivers a race start count!

I have spend hours in researching and asking many F1 statistician who are famous and know more on Grand Prix. All the statisian I have contacted and got back told me it is actually DNS not Ret, they also have mention the formula1.com is not very accurate with their race results. The formula1.com is incorrect as listing as ret instead of DNS for 2005-USA. This were the responses from the following people. Renowned F1 statistians, like David Hayhoe or Autosport's Peter Higham agree that all Michelin drivers were DNS in 2005-USA, but consider a RET if a driver didn't made a re-start, for example. That was the common view in the past - no contemporary source listed Lauda as a DNS in 1976-Germany - and they simply ignore the current "null and void" FIA rule. I totally agree to change it as DNS not Ret as they didn't take part on the first lap.

Here is a intersting fact. Button will start his 100th race start in the 2005-China race. But according to wikipedia when doing the math by adding all Button race starts it would be his 101st race start in China as Button has been listed as Ret instead of DNS for this year 2005-USA race. Does this make sense to you. That means wikipedia will have an extra race start for all the drivers who have no started in the 2005 USA race have an extra race start which wouldn't be official to the drivers stats.

I am trying to help you all to have accurate data on Formula 1 on wikipedia. I DO beleive the formula1.com site doesn't not give out accurate race classifications. As I have been involved with FORIX and autosport.com for many years as my job is to look for incorrect data on their server. Andreas 04 October 09:36

Avengers fan

Yeah, I did. Writing to those anon ips won't do any good - the merge discussion is over and consensus has been reached. Unless something radically changes to provide a basis for rearguing the acse, I don't see any reason to re-open the discussion, especially so soon after the last one. I've already warned him about reverting, and if he does so again, I'll consider it vandalism and block accordingly. --khaosworks (talkcontribs) 13:38, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll need another admin for this. --khaosworks (talkcontribs) 11:23, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

WP:RM#Proposed changes

If you are still interested in the subject please see WP:RM#Proposed changes. --Philip Baird Shearer 21:33, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Lady Deathstrike

The SHB has the people who wrote her first appearance in Daredevil as her creators, but her character was rapidly changed in subsequent issues. Should the the guy who made her a villain in Alpha Flight, and Chris Claremont (who made her into the 'cyborg woman who wants revenge on Wolverine', which is what she is most known for today) also be noted? --DrBat 21:45, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Captain Britain

In response to your comment left on my user talk page, do you think the storyline Crooked World/Jasper's Warp is significant enough for its own article? If so, it would make the page a lot neater (as it doesn't really fit in the rest of the article) and restore the List of significant stories. Thoughts? --Jamdav86 10:07, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Wolverine Powers

Why did you move the Powers and abilities section to the bottom most the page? It isn't consistant with most page formats.T-1000 20:31, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks For The Advice

Thank you for the advice you gave me about how to edit the Livewires article so that the cleanup notice can be removed. I finally got the time to edit it. Hopefully the cleanup notive can be removed soon. If there is anything else I can do there, and advice would be great. Just tell me on that article's discussion page. (Stephen Day 18:43, 29 October 2005 (UTC))

WP:COMICSCOTF

Cheers for that, sorry went away for a week. As to an easier way, feel free to play. I just copied the template across is all. Steve block talk 12:00, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

WHAT-

WHAT IS WRONG!?!? The Picture was uploaded with all the appropriate information!!!! The picture is NOT out of focus, and it is not too big! What does FU mean? Do NOT delete the image!!!!

Michael 18:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Some other things-

Some other things!

The picture is from an old Marvel Comic book dating back to around 1983... The comic is in otherwise good condition; What is the BEEF?

User_Talk:Michael_Reiter

The Picture of Vance Astro-

The comic book it came from, is twenty two years old.

Paper and image degradation is to be expected... How about if I put a new, improved one on?


Michael 20:19, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

What does FU mean?

What does FU Mean? It better not mean FUCK YOU... Michael 16:25, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Response to Response 2

No. That's what you were saying to me, I think. Is that the case? It better not be. Clarify FU, because that is what you said to me... Michael 15:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah?

Ditto. Next time add a link to lessen the chance of an online argument. Online shorthand is less than professional, not to mention juvenile. My Apologies to all concerned.

Michael 18:00, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

User talk:Michael Reiter

You and Michael Reiter seem to have managed a series of escalating misunderstandings, in which you each thought the other was being abusive; it's clear, though, that neither of you was. If you can both take a few deep breaths and try again, you might still disagree over the image, but at least you can disagree in a friendly fashion.

I can see your point with regard to the quality of the scan, but if there's no better alternative it would surely be better to see how this one can be improved. Does fair use preclude tidying it up? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:31, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Randall and Hopkirk DVD

Hi! I noticed you added a note saying that you own the DVD of season one of R&H; and that your copy does not have a lenticular cover. I too own the DVD and my copy does! Bizarre! My copy has a normal printed sleeve, but on top (and underneath the plastic of the box still) there is a lenticular sleeve which places over the standard print.

I uploaded an image of the cover here: [1]

PeregrineAinsleyWotenuff 21:04, 6 November 2005 (UTC)


Deadpool

We didn't really sort it out. We're just going to have to agree to disagree. And we'll keep changing it back and forth.

User:Ghola8

Thanks for the correction, I wasn't sure what Talk page protocol is. I'll be sure to add to the bottom from now on.

Personal tools