User talk:Dreaded Walrus/Archives/October 2007

Could You Look At This Please?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Freer

I'm new to Wikipedia editing and am not sure if I'm doing the right thing here. You seem to be pretty well respected and seen work on a few game related pages so would be grateful for any guidance.

Cheers :) gaz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gravy (talk • contribs) 12:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Quarters

Good job on the revert of Quarters. That kind of spamming, frat-boy vandalism drives me crazy. Thanks for the help. Snowfire51 05:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem at all. You should have seen the state of the article back in June, or, even worse, May.... Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 06:37, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey

how come shenmue dojo gets a link, but Shenmue Campaign, cant a have link, there both fan related sites, neither is official, and i think shenmue campaign has a lot of relevance to the series and the stuff that going on with the game today, believe it our not, but this is kinda the history of the game, and its current status in the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngates87 (talk • contribs) 16:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Shenmue Dojo is a massive, well-known site, with 30,000 google hits, while Shenmue Campaign seems to get around 900, which seem to be made up entirely of links from forums/comments pages. Additionally, Shenmuecampaign.org has an Alexa rank of 8,168,101, with Shenmuecampaign.com having an Alexa rank so low, that there is no data on it. Shenmue Campaign appears to be in no way comparable to Shenmue Dojo in terms of size, success, or importance to the community. The Shenmue series is by far my favourite video game series, and I would be delighted were they ever to make a third game in the series and release it, but Wikipedia is not a place to promote sites. See also, WP:COI. --Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 17:42, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Yea I think its by far my all time series, I hate so say but I think I like more then Sonic and Mario put together. I glad to hear that you at least checked out the site and hope you would consider signing up to it. However if one day that site does reach the level of the Shenmue Dojo, i hope you would consider putting it under the links, I'm only trying to contribute to Wikipedia in what small ways I can, but it seems most of my edits eventually get changed. - Ngates87

Anti-spam hammer

User:Wizardry Dragon/Awards/antispamhammer For your work in helping elimination spam, I award you this anti-spam hammer. Good work! — Frecklefσσt | Talk 18:11, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I've added it to my userpage, thanks very much. :) --Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 13:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Football Manager 2008

Hello,

My bad. I didn't realize that the citation was a forum post. I thought it was something like an article. Sorry about that. Cheers ^_^ — Prodigenous Zee - 02:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

No probs mate. I didn't want to give you a boilerplate warning or anything, because it obviously wasn't malicious on your part, and you appear to be an established editor. Keep up the good work. :) --Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 02:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Kotaku

Whups. Thanks for taking my sig out of the article. It's been a while since I've edited. GeeCee 04:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I've made that problem once or twice in the past, it's no big deal. :) --Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 05:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The Invasion

Although I think it's silly that Criticisms is being singled out, I am attempting to cite as much as I can to justify Criticism's existence. However, you're probably far more erudite to Wiki as I am. Since you are keeping an eye out on The Invasion, I hope you may also keep an eye out for goofs I may make, like the References. I try my best and want to keep the article as clean as possible, but stupid things like double references keep occurring. I will do my best to clean the article up and fix it, but I hope you can bear with me and tidy up any goofs I may make! Thanks. Frightwolf —Preceding comment was added at 03:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I've only just added the page to my watchlist - I only became aware of the page by your message on User:3bulletproof16's talk page, which was on my watchlist. After my initial reversion of your edit, I have no real intention of getting into an edit war over the inclusion of the section. I just feel that criticism sections, above all, should be referenced to the hilt. And if a particular criticism is notable and common, then it shouldn't be too difficult to find lots of excellent citations. I feel that just because the article had no references, is not an excuse to add a bunch more unreferenced material, you know? Anyway, don't worry about making honest mistakes, like putting a references section at the very bottom of the edit window, rather than in the correct place. We all make mistakes.

What I will say is, if you do ever need help with anything, feel free to ask here and I will help as best as I can. Also, be aware that, here, you used Wikipedia as a source. We can't do that, as Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, and is therefore not a reliable source. Likewise with internet forums and the like. What you may want to consider doing, while finding references for the section, is moving it into your own personal space (maybe at User:Frightwolf/Invasion criticism or something along those lines), where you can work on getting as many references as possible without worrying about it being removed and the like. It also avoids potential edit wars. :) --Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 04:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I understand your point about Criticisms. My problem is citing certain statements. For example, we both know that the McMahon feud was done quite a bit before the Invasion in various shapes and forms. But how would you go about citing that? We both know that Stone Cold had far more prominence in the WWE than in WCW or ECW, but what would I find to cite that? I understand that we're trying to make this article completely accessible to anyone, where they wouldn't have to rely on previous knowledge to trust the content of the article, but some things are a bit hard to actually cite for. To make up for some of my hardships, I'm trying to cite specific example, like Youtube links to different matches to back up some of the statements. For the McMahon point, I'm thinking of citing clips from the Higher Power incident, Stephanie betraying her father at Unforgiven, WM16's main event, etc. I'm sure actual footage is legitimate, anyway. Then I'm scared that the people at Youtube may delete their videos. =P

But I'll trying my damnedest, anyway. --Frightwolf

Actually, the problem with using Youtube as a source is not that whether the actual footage is legitimate (a video showing Booker T winning would be a great source for a claim that Booker T won, for example), but rather that Wikipedia cannot contain, or link to copyright violations, which is what that particular video is, as I'm assuming it hasn't been uploaded with permission of the WWE. This is a major, major issue, so any links to videos uploaded without the permission of the copyright holder must not be used as citation.

As for what kinds of things count as citations, it's pretty simple. If we want to say that Stone Cold had far more prominence in the WWE compared to WCW, we must simply find a source that says that exact thing (maybe not the exact words, but you know what I mean). Sorry I cannot respond more fully, it is quite late where I am, so I'm not at my most verbose. --Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 04:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)