User talk:Percy Snoodle

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

RE: Your comment on the FICT RfC

In response to your statement that articles which have in-universe subarticles too large to integrate into the main article are necessarily giving too much weight to in-universe information, the fault generally lies not with the article, but with that irritating thing called reality. The simple fact is, when a story has been in weekly serialization for half a decade, all you can fit of the plot in a section of comparable length to the ones on the important things, like real-world history and reception, is a summary of a summary of the first fragment of the plot. And while summaries like that may be fine for a lead section, they in no way satisfy the requirements of completeness and accuracy that an encyclopedia article needs to give.

In universe information must be kept succinct, yes, but we cannot make our summaries misrepresent the series just because we don't like how many words it takes to explain it properly. Brevity won't excuse being wrong. On your average long running manga series, for instance, if we condensed all the in-universe information down to a single, confusingly incomplete block of summary, then maybe we could cover the plot in a main article that was 120kb long, if we had very little out of universe information... but that doesn't help our readers at all, much less keep the article from being skewed towards fictional coverage! --erachima talk 10:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I see your point, but I disagree. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought - it exists to reflect reality, not the other way round. If people outside wikipedia haven't seen fit to comment on a series, nor should we. For extremely long-running series, it's usually sufficient to say that they chart the adventures of their characters. If further plot details would just confuse things, then we shouldn't include them at all. For example, Doctor Who is described like this: "The programme depicts the adventures of a mysterious alien time-traveller known as "the Doctor" who travels in his space and time-ship, the TARDIS, which appears from the exterior to be a blue police phone box. With his companions, he explores time and space, solving problems and righting wrongs." It goes on to describe some of the characters (since they have real-world coverage too) but doesn't give any more description of the plot. For a series with no real-world coverage, that would be all you'd need to give. Percy Snoodle (talk) 10:43, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:WHO has articles on every single episode, last I checked. Many of them with a level of plot detail that far outweighs the corresponding out of universe information. [break]

Yes - I was giving an example of what a concise plot summary can look like, not of a non-notable fictional article. Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

That brings up two other important practical differences that I've noticed usually come up when I'm discussing these things with editors who focus more on Western fiction: firstly, anime and manga series tend to be far less episodic than western television, so you can't give a generic summary like that and expect it to be accurate for anything past the first arc. [break]

I don't see why not. "Pokemon follows the quest of Ash Ketchum (known as Satoshi in Japan), a Pokémon Master in training, as he and a small group of friends travel around the fictitious world of Pokémon along with their collections of small monsters." Even if the entire cast changes, it should be possible to summarise almost any series in that way. Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Secondly, the difference between an article that is currently missing out of universe information and an article where there is none available is a lot harder to distinguish when the majority of your potential references are in a foreign language. Eventualism should take care of the second one, yes, but in practice, how many deletion-seeking editors will be willing to go "ok, we'll wait two years for these characters to be included in officially released English content before complaining about their lack of development and inspiration info"? --erachima talk 11:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the issue of foreign-language references is a big one. Nothing in WP:N or WP:PLOT says that the real-world coverage has to be in the English language, but some editors do ignore any non-English coverage. Perhaps WP:FICT needs to say something like "real-world coverage is not required to be found in English-language sources; indeed, it is usually to be found in sources in the work's original language. Tertiary sources which provide translations of that coverage are strongly encouraged, but not mandatory." Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Username question

Hey, just out of curiosity, was this the inspiration for your username? Mine is a combination of The Pumpkin King and The Great Pumpkin, but in French. Regards, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 06:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it was. I should get round to finishing that one day. Percy Snoodle (talk) 07:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, and I just notice you also link to it on your userpage. Good luck with finishing it! Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 16:58, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Refactoring of discussion at WT:FICT

I would be grateful if you would refrain from inserting your comments between paragraphs of my contributions (breaks), and from adding subsequent comments before mine (interuptions). If you need to comment on something I have written, or something written by someone before me, simply draw reference to what was said and by whom, rather than placing your comments in between or ahead of everyone else. I know that breaks and interuptions are permisable and are sometimes warranted, but since my contributions tend to be short and or bulleted, I would be grateful if you could avoid interuptions, as I have a limited ability to follow my own discussions unless they go in chronological order.--Gavin Collins (talk) 09:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Mr Pot? Mr Kettle has a message for you. He says you absorb visible wavelengths of light. Percy Snoodle (talk) 10:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Editing Wikipedia:Notability (fiction)

I would request that you refrain editing WP:FICT, and ask you to request that other editors do the same until the current RFC has drawn to a close. I have no right to ask this, but until the discussions have finished, I feel the creation of new versions every day makes the discussion at WT:FICT difficult to follow. I have asked the same of Masem. --Gavin Collins (talk) 16:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Volume of contributions too much for you? Now you know how we feel about your tag spamming. Percy Snoodle (talk) 17:55, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

• The volume of contributions is very high from you, Masem and now Sambc, but I think it is self-defeating: as soon as you add something to the guideline, it seems to get over written. I think your arbitrary redrafting of WP:FICT is making this page increasingly unstable.--Gavin Collins (talk) 11:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
  • You have better things to do than taunt me. Go away. Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:38, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Link please.

You keep mentioning recent RFC's on status of spinout articles. Can you link them so I can read them? Taemyr (talk) 09:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem - the one I'm talking about is Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction)/RFC1 - it was around just before you came to the discussion; you must have just missed it. Percy Snoodle (talk) 10:53, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Mediation?

Percy,

You and Jeske are the two admins I associate most closely with Wikiproject D&D, so I figured I’d approach you about this (posting this on both talkpages). As you know, there has been a lot of drama over User:Gavin.collins and his editing style and how it applies to RPG articles and fiction articles in general. I know that both of you agree with some of the things he’s trying to accomplish but that you’ve both also had conflicts over his approach to editing. There is a long list of editors that have had conflicts with him, spanning over the talk pages of who knows how many articles and user pages. The RfC conducted six months ago softened his approach somewhat, but the conflicts continue, as seen most recently here today.

Now, we could all continue this way in perpetuity. Perhaps one or more people will get themselves in trouble over it, or it could continue to be a long drawn-out trench war. Maybe Gavin will eventually give up and leave, or maybe the most vocal/active of the RPG editors will do so. But that’s not how Wikipedia is supposed to work. It’s supposed to be discussion, collaboration, debate, and consensus. It’s supposed to be civility, assuming good faith, no personal attacks, and handling disputes like adults. And we just don’t have that on D&D articles when Gavin is involved.

Gavin has very specific, firmly held, soundly-reasoned (in his own mind at least) reasons for wanting things the way they are. This is fine. Everybody he interacts with wants things their own way. This is fine, too. However, in a give-and-take atmosphere of compromise, “Do it my way or else” doesn’t work. Gavin may very well be right about some of the things he’s talking about, but bad interactions have colored people’s perspectives against him. People respond to his words and actions defensively, and soon incivility flies back and forth between both parties and nothing positive can be accomplished (or anything that is accomplished leaves a bad taste in someone's mouth). Sometimes other editors have attacked him preemptively, and sometimes he comes on as the aggressor. I don’t want to think that the numerous people who’ve had these interactions with him are always the ones in the wrong; with Gavin usually the only person on the other side of the coin, he seems to be the common denominator in the equation. If he really was always as right as he seems to think he is, wouldn’t more people be rushing to defend him and his viewpoints?

But Wikipedia, again, is not about being right or wrong; it’s about building an encyclopedia with consensus. Some of us have tried to deal with Gavin politely, and bring up the issue of his civility, or point out where he may be tagging an article inappropriately. This seems to have little or no effect, and this struggle has been going on for over six months now with no end in sight. So, rather than continue a seemingly eternal conflict, I would like to bring up a request for Mediation to try to get us to a point where Gavin can do his thing without butting heads relentlessly. I can only hope that will help. Maybe some mentoring would help with his WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF and other issues. Perhaps some of the RPG editors could use this as well, but I can’t honestly see us being the crux of the problem.

Please let me know what you think of this. BOZ (talk) 18:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I got Jeske's full support, so I decided to ask the Wikiproject members how they feel about a Request for Mediation with Gavin. BOZ (talk) 03:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Great, I'll chip in there. For the record, I'm not an admin, but I'm flattered :-) Percy Snoodle (talk) 08:19, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

No kidding! I thought you were. Maybe you just speak with authority.  ;) BOZ (talk) 14:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I am alerting you that we are now considering a Request for Arbitration regarding him as an alternative to mediation, and would like your opinion on the matter. BOZ (talk) 13:34, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion policy

You wrote: "Rv - AFDs are not votes and should not become votes". Your rush to revert my edit will only serve to avoid discussion of the fact that AfDs actually are decided by head count. Refer to [1]. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 13:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I have started a discussion about AfD being a discussion versus a vote here. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 16:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

WT:FICT

I beleive this remark was aimed at me. I don't mind a bit of venting, but these insults are hurtful. Please be civil, if you can. --Gavin Collins (talk) 15:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The R.R. show

Just finished reading the Afd on Randy Richards (I was tempted to alter that exact phrase, but, no, I hope his auto-googling leads him to this comment). What an appalling douchebag. I ran across him a few years ago on the Necromancer Games message boards, and was flabbergasted by his peculiar combination of talentlessness and pathological self-promotion. It's sad to see him still at the same game, wasting other people's time to inflate himself. You displayed the patience of a saint. Truly Trivial (talk) 18:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Awards as evidence of notability for Elements of Fiction

With regard to the discussion you initiated at AFI 100 as an example, I would be grateful if you would make your views known regarding the inclusion of awards in Elements of fiction.--Gavin Collins (talk) 22:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

• My view is that awards can constitute evidence of notability of elements of fiction, so long as the award is a highly notable one; particularly if the elements that the awards have been given for in the past have all achieved notability under the GNC. Percy Snoodle (talk) 07:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Shadow_Knight.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Shadow_Knight.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rockfang (talk) 01:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Abandoned versus failed

Percy, I like your abandoned tag as being a clearer statement of the result, but if we need such a tag, it should be discussed at WP:Policy and established. However, I absolutely oppose official looking custom tags being created on the fly. I also am concerned about establishing a confusing array of accepted tags, but I could be persuaded that this would be useful. I look forward to working with you on this. Thanks! --Kevin Murray (talk) 18:04, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I don't really think it should be classed as a "failed request" as no "request" was ever made that failed. But I'm happy with whatever so long as users who go to WP:RPG/N are pointed to the right place. Percy Snoodle (talk) 07:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

redirectly to disambiguation

Instead of "stealing" a redirect (as you did with L bar, next time how about converting it into a disambiguation? —EncMstr (talk) 16:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I checked and there were no links to the page, so I didn't think it was worth the effort; but I agree it's a better solution and I'm glad you've put the work in. Thanks! Percy Snoodle (talk) 19:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Many redirects have no links. They are present to bring alternative names, misspellings, etc. to the proper article. See WP:Redirect#What_do_we_use_redirects_for.3F. Regards, —EncMstr (talk) 20:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Catan computer game

Hi,

Saw you removed the information on the Catan computer game. I added it to the page seeing no other good place to put it. In other words, the information there was a Catan computer game that didn't require a subscription is now lost with your edit. Let's cooperate to add back this information, shall we? Feel free to add your advice on the Catan talk page on how to improve the information instead of just erasing it! Cheers, CapnZapp (talk) 23:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

It's my feeling that gameplay descriptions of an out-of-print implementation of the game, without any coverage to show that that implementation was in any way important, was excessive. Indeed, the fact that the game was no longer for sale was mentioned twice. Further, the information was in an inappropriate second-person form that made it read like an advert; though that issue could be resolved if sources were found to show that inclusion of the information was appropriate. It may be that there is a better place to put it - perhaps the somewhat sparse Catan article could be repurposed as an article on official Catan implementations - or more likely it would be more appropriate on an external resource. I'm not aware of an exhaustive project to detail computer implementations of board games, but perhaps BoardGameGeek would be a good starting point. Percy Snoodle (talk) 10:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The Last Adventure

Hi. It's neat that you've been in touch with Christopher Bidmead - I was just watching his Castrovalva and Logopolis a few days ago. Anyway, I checked my source and as indicated in the reference, this is mentioned on page 211: "A submissioned was commissioned from Christopher H. Bidmead on 29 October 1985 under the working title The Last Adventure, although this would later be changed to Pinacotheca." I'll add this to the talk page, too. 23skidoo (talk) 15:36, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Percy Snoodle (talk) 15:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

DWM 255

Hi. I'm not sure what to add from the article, though I did scan it. If you want to take a look, you can e-mail me via Wikipedia. It probably wouldn't be too popular if I started putting up pages from DWM on here. :) Davhorn (talk) 21:06, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, probably not :-) I'll send you a mail - thanks! Percy Snoodle (talk) 07:53, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7

Hi there!  :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 15:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Not sure how much use I'll be with D&D but I'll do my best. Percy Snoodle (talk) 15:21, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

The general RPG project has a few more selected as well, plus any other wikiproject you work on is likely to have some selected.  :) BOZ (talk) 15:23, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I was going to suggest looking at the list for WP:RPG; Dragonlance was among them, for example. Percy Snoodle (talk) 15:27, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Yep, and Gary Gygax as well! (I noticed when you changed the assessment on Dragonlance, which is why I thought of you!) Happy editing. :) BOZ (talk) 15:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

K9 & Co

I'm surprised no one thought about that one for the Unmade stories list. I think the recent DVD release of A Girls Best Friend may provide some good material talking about what the plans were for the show, and so forth. I'm thinking of also adding "The Six Doctors" (Robert Holmes script which was abandoned and replaced by The Five Doctors) based upon the info included in that DVD release. I need to watch the featurettes again to get my info straight before I do anything (feel free to jump ahead if you want to tackle it!). Russell Davies also has just revealed an aborted plan to do a Christmas episode with JK Rowling in his autobiography which might be worth adding, too. 23skidoo (talk) 17:47, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Your opinion

Could I get your opinion on this article (User:Chunky Rice/Funagain Games)? It was deleted at AfD about a year back. I've bolstered it with a couple refs, but I'm still not sure about it. I trust your opinion regarding the notability of game-related topics, so I'd appreciate it if you'd take a look and tell me if you think it's ready for prime-time or if I should wait for more sourcing. Thanks. -Chunky Rice (talk) 21:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

You've got two newspaper refs, the Tom Vasel ref, and some press releases. The press releases don't really count towards notability. That leaves you with three; that's usually enough to survive an AFD. If people question the Tom Vasel interview, you've still got two, which is enough to technically pass WP:N. So I reckon the article has a good chance of surviving. If someone slaps a speedy-delete tag on it for having been recreated, let me know and I'll take it off; you've definitely added enough to the article for it to count as substantially different. Thanks for the work you've put in! Percy Snoodle (talk) 06:18, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the second opinion. I've moved it into article space, so I'll just keep my fingers crossed. -Chunky Rice (talk) 00:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Please contribute to my WIKI-RP

• KNOWL is playing WIKI RP on his user page and invites you to donate your favorite weapon in his RP LOG!WIKI-RP

-Knowl <(Go to my user page to play WIKI RP! Its FUN and educational!) (talk) 11:06, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms

Hello. :) If you hadn't heard, Gary Gygax and Wizards of the Coast have recently been promoted to "Good Article" status. I was also thinking of nominating Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms, and I figured I'd contact you since you've done some work on at least one of those. See the project talk page for discussion on that. BOZ (talk) 20:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment on Gavin.collins

Hello. :) Could you please comment here on the latest outbreak of activity from Gavin.collins? Thank you. BOZ (talk) 21:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll have a look into it at lunch - though to be frank I don't know how much use I'll be. On the one hand, I'm sick of the guy, and don't believe he can ever be made to behave like a reasonable human being; and on the other, I'm more worried by the fundamentalist inclusionists than mere nuisances like him. All he wants to do is take ownership of the wiki by slapping tags all over it - he doesn't want to fill it up with nonsense until it's useless. Percy Snoodle (talk) 09:08, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Gavin.collins RFC/U

Hello. A request for comment on user conduct has recently been filed regarding Gavin.collins. Since you had endorsed at least one summary in the prior Request for Comment, I thought that you would want to know. You can see the RFC/U here. Thank you. BOZ (talk) 00:42, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for endorsing one or more summaries in the RFC. Please note that two proposals have been put forward on how we can move on after the RFC: Casliber's proposal and Randomran's proposal. Please take the time to look over these proposals, and consider endorsing one of them, or writing one of your own. Thanks again for your participation! BOZ (talk) 03:34, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Threshold (online game)

Hello, I'm writing because you were at one time a significant contributor to Threshold (online game). Some issues have come up regarding the article's contents, and I'm at an impasse with a possibly-COI affected editor. I would greatly appreciate your participation at Talk:Threshold (online game). —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 02:08, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Schweizer Spielepreis.gif)

You've uploaded File:Schweizer Spielepreis.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:48, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Dragonlance GA

Hey there! Just letting you know that we have nominated Dragonlance to be a Good Article, and it is currently up for review. :) BOZ (talk) 00:16, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Just wanted to say Hi, after having passed my recent Request for adminship. How's everything going?

Hi. Congratulations! Things are OK with me - been busy at work, though, so not been around here on WP much.

I don't know if you've been around in a while, but I'd like to point out to you the success we've had with the D&D GA-drive so far: Gary Gygax, Wizards of the Coast, Dragons of Despair, Drizzt Do'Urden, Forgotten Realms, Tomb of Horrors, Dwellers of the Forbidden City, White Plume Mountain, The Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth, Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, Planescape: Torment, Dragonlance, and Against the Giants, and we plan to hit Dave Arneson and Drow (Dungeons & Dragons) after some work. :)

Wow - well done!

If you're interested in coming around to check out what we've been up to, you are welcome as always. :) BOZ (talk) 17:49, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Percy Snoodle (talk) 14:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Late reply here - you're welcome, though. :) I'd like to think that things around the wikiproject have been improving for the better. We're much better organized, can improve articles on important subjects effectively, have a better handle on what to do with less important subjects, and our stalkers seem to be leaving us alone while we do it. :) If you get less busy, come around and check it out! BOZ (talk) 19:17, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Noctum: Vivisection and Antagonists of Noctum

My two Noctum-related articles have been proposed for removal because of: "Non-notable game supplement. No secondary coverage; fails WP:N" and "List of in-game elements with no secondary coverage; fails WP:N" What needs to be edited so the articles won't be removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theasp87 (talk • contribs) 18:34, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

You need to add references showing that the topics of the articles have been the subject of substantial coverage in independent, reliable secondary sources. If such sources don't exist, then consider a merge. Percy Snoodle (talk) 06:26, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I've updated the Vivisection page with external links to the developers blog and Mongoose Publishing's webpage, is that enough for Vivisection? Theasp87

Not really, no; neither the developer nor the publisher are independent. You need to be looking for third-party coverage to pass WP:N. Percy Snoodle (talk) 07:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Alright, we'll fix that ASAP, We can integrate the Antagonists into the main Noctum page. And seeing as Vivisection is still under development we'll post a third party interview or review when possible. Thanks for the help :) Asp (talk) 12:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion of Noctum

What do you mean by "no independent coverage"? And how do we fix it? Asp (talk) 10:12, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

"No independent coverage" means that the game hasn't received coverage in independent sources; for example, if all the external links and references in a page point to sites belonging to or affiliated with the authors of the product the page describes, then the topic appears to have no independent coverage. The way to fix it is to find independent coverage, for example reviews in magazines with no connection to the authors, and to add them to the page. If the product is too new to have received such coverage, then it's a policy here to remove the article about the product; but there are ways to preserve the information in the meantime, for example by creating a user page. The topic is covered in more depth at Wikipedia:Notability. Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:52, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Role-playing game

Did you mean to do this? Wyatt Riot (talk) 21:54, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

No - oops! I was having connection problems and had to resubmit a couple of times; it looked like it had worked, but I guess not. I see it was fixed soon enough - I should thank IanCheeseman. Phew. Percy Snoodle (talk) 06:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

In fact, I think I see what happened now: I lost my session, so I went back in my browser history and copied the text into a new edit window; but the first time I'd edited the section, and the second time I'd edited the whole article. Percy Snoodle (talk) 06:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I've done that (or come close) a few times. I just wasn't sure if it was a mistake or if you were maybe archiving the talk page or something. Anyways, have a nice day! Wyatt Riot (talk) 09:40, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of James Ulysses Bond

The article James Ulysses Bond has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable; a man who seems only to be notable for his death, and minor local news coverage he received as a result of that

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. GiantSnowman 12:26, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Notes on Free Form RPG

When we are talking about Free Form RPG's are we talking about Live Action Role Playing or Role Playing Games without more formalized rules? The difference seems to be some what convoluted here in Wikipedia. I feel that the note you deleted was very relevant to the article and I'm just trying to understand whether or not it should have been made under a different heading.--Kthapelo (talk) 14:18, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

LARP is covered at Live-action role-playing game; games with few or no rules are covered at Freeform role-playing game. I deleted the note for a few reasons:

• The statement it made about different names for GM wasn't specific to free-form games. The position has many different names outside the world of freeforms - the three examples you provided were all imports from non-freeform games.
• The lead-up - "Because the nature of Free Form Role Playing emphasizes the experience, rather than closely simulating reality" - implies that most non-freeform games are simulationist; that's not the case. The most popular such game, D&D, is firmly gamist whereas most modern games have at least some narrativist slant.
• The source you added didn't back up the statement you were making; it merely demonstrated that GURPS uses the term GM. It's good to add references, but only in support of the point being made; if you want to define terms, wikilink them and add the reference on the term's page.
• The freeform section is just meant to be an overview; any substantial points about freeforms should be added to the freeform page.

That said, I do welcome your contributions - hopefully we can find a good home for them. Perhaps the points you raise would be more appropriately presented on the Gamemaster page? Percy Snoodle (talk) 14:44, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Role Players Creed

Hello Percy Snoodle, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Role Players Creed has been removed. It was removed by Kthapelo with the following edit summary '(Citing publication for notability.)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Kthapelo before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:01, 30 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 20:01, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for Keeping Role Playing Game Sensible

I've read your numerous encounters with various Wikipedia contributors who seem intent on emptying the term role-playing (in the sense of characterization of a role) of meaning, and I want to applaud you for keeping a cool head and making sure this important distinction is not lost to future gamers. I, for one, and many other "tabletop" role-players like myself, harbor no disdain for role-playing video games, but we definitely agree with you (and the history of the game) that "role-playing" in video games is an entirely different experience than actually characterizing a role in the tabletop, or in a LARP, et cetera.

I think your most important contribution in this regard has been your summary of how role-playing video games evolved from the traditional tabletop game (which I have cited below). I am reminded of the book, 30 Years of Dungeons and Dragons, wherein it is recounted that Peter Adkison (who as we know was instrumental in fundamentally changing D&D after Wizards of the Coast bought TSR) is quoted as saying that he wanted to make the game more "amenable" to video games in drafting Third Edition. (alas)

"Role-playing games in the modern sense came into being because Gygax wanted to make a better wargame. In the resulting games, he and Arneson found that players were developing characterisation for their pieces. They called this "role-playing" and released a game, D&D, which provided a wargame-based-framework around which players could roleplay. Video games were produced which mimicked the wargame-based-framework; these came to be known within video gaming as role-playing games, and the activity of playing them came to be known within video gaming as role-playing. Meanwhile, the role-playing game industry gradually abandoned the wargame-based-framework and emphasised the characterisation aspect. So the meaning used within video gaming came to be less and less associated with the meaning used outside it. Video gaming is a very popular pursuit and a great many books and studies have been written from the point of view of the video gaming industry; it's only right that they should use that industry's term for the activities they describe. But whether they acknowledge the POV, or just assume it, it's still a POV and not the only one."

Thanks again. - DJ Quinn --70.109.131.205 (talk) 09:17, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

You're very welcome - thanks for the support! Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:09, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Naming/content of Role-playing game

Hi, I see from your previous posts that you have an interest in the naming/content of Role-playing game. That article currently describes tabletop roleplaying games, with other forms of roleplaying such as video RPGs and LARP described as a variety of tabletop game. Based on the comments on the talk page, it seems that many users are surprised to find that the article Role-playing game is about tabletop role-playing games.

I have made a proposal that in order to meet the WP:NAME policy that article should describe all activities commonly described as role-playing games on an equal footing, and that a new article Tabletop role-playing game should be created to describe tabletop roleplaying games. If you have the time I'd be grateful if you could give your opinion on my proposal at Talk:Role-playing game. Ryan Paddy (talk) 23:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Percy Snoodle (talk) 09:29, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

No worries, I messaged everyone who has contributed to previous debates on the name/content on the current talk page, and also contacted the relevant Wikiprojects (RPG and video game). Just a note - could you please not cut up my posts with intercut replies? I know you haven't done this yet, but I've seen it further up the talk page and would prefer that it's avoided, as I find it makes the page hard to read as cohesive arguments are turned into soundbites. Cheers, Ryan Paddy (talk) 18:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I prefer to rebut point-by-point but I'll do my best :-) Percy Snoodle (talk) 19:06, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Curriculum vitae

I have started a move discussion about CV, Curriculum vitae and Résumé. You have previously participated in this topic, and I would like your input in this discussion if you are still interested. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 00:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Computer role-playing game and others

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated articles are Computer role-playing game, Console role-playing game. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to the relevant discussion pages: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Computer role-playing game for Computer role-playing game, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Console role-playing game for Console role-playing game. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:13, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:R to member

Template:R to member has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:26, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Revision to Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire and Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri articles

I noticed that you have revised either Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri or Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire.

I intend to revise those articles following the Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. There are more details on the discussion pages of those articles. I'd be interested in any comments you have. It would be best if your comments were on the discussion pages of the two articles.

Thank you.

Vyeh (talk) 01:48, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Atmosfear

I have notice you have added to the Atmosfear article and I just letting you know I have proposal to start a WikiProject on Atmosfear to improve its coverage. I hope you can join and help out. :) d'oh! _talk 13:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Amino Communications

The article Amino Communications has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:26, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Cat (role-playing game)

The article Cat (role-playing game) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of coverage in reliable sources to demonstrate notability; official website is now a dead link suggesting this will not change in future.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~ mazca ^talk 18:53, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Wheel of Fortune (Home Game) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wheel of Fortune (Home Game). Since you had some involvement with the Wheel of Fortune (Home Game) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 23:11, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Role-playing game terms

Category:Role-playing game terms, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 15:12, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Panel game

Hello! I saw your editing of the panel game article and would really appreciate it if you could briefly pop into a discussion on the Hollywood Squares article on whether it is a panel game (there are cited descriptions if you're unfamiliar with the show). Here's the discussion. Thank you so much! 76.105.176.44 (talk) 22:43, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ambisinister

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Ambisinister requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Petiatil ^»Talk 13:19, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ambisinister

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Ambisinister requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Petiatil ^»Talk 13:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ambisinister

The article Ambisinister has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Prior CSD-A7 however this was disputed. Switched to proposed deletion for this article because there really Isn't any content that makes the 'subject' remarkable. Nothing argues why this subject is encyclopedic.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Petiatil ^»Talk 13:47, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Ambisinister for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ambisinister is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ambisinister until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:58, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

List of unmade Doctor Who serials and films

I have nominated List of unmade Doctor Who serials and films for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. --He to Hecuba (talk) 18:24, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Sword World RPG.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Sword World RPG.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:43, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Character point

The article Character point has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Stale article; nowhere meeting guidelines for the past several years.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 08:37, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Friedey's

The article Friedey's has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Trivia

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. occono (talk) 19:45, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Cross and Circle games

Category:Cross and Circle games, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. pbp 20:46, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who like NationStates

Hey! If you're interested, I started a series of userboxes for the game NationStates. Feel free to add any or add your own!-🐦Do☭torWho42 (⭐) 05:10, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Asmodée Éditions for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Asmodée Éditions is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asmodée Éditions until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. HighKing⁺⁺ 12:56, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of HackMaster (software)

The article HackMaster (software) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not seem to be notable software. Sourced only to the project's home page and the only thing that comes up in my searches is related to the game of the same name.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Reyk _YO! 10:29, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Diana: Warrior Princess for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Diana: Warrior Princess is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diana: Warrior Princess until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Chetsford (talk) 19:40, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mask Trilogy

The article Mask Trilogy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Quick note: the three games in the series are possibly notable. THE series is not. No evidence this should become a disambig. The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline nor the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies)'s section for products requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:17, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

FLCR for Doctor Who unmade serials and films

I have nominated List of unmade Doctor Who serials and films for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 02:02, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

"Wikipedia:NOTGAME" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Wikipedia:NOTGAME. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 7#Wikipedia:NOTGAME until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:05, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Mask Trilogy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mask Trilogy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mask Trilogy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Imcdc (talk) 03:45, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Mask Trilogy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mask Trilogy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mask Trilogy (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:57, 19 August 2022 (UTC)