User talk:Ferret/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 15

Sock: Maxwel.Rugby

User:Maxwel.Rugby is yet another sock of Lurulu. Same MO - with the period in his name with repeat editing on Simple Minds articles and not understanding editing basics. Hopefully you can ban him. Thanks. --Jennica✿ / ^talk 19:35, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

@Jennica:  Done -- ferret (talk) 19:59, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Another one of the same. User:Rita.Wren. Thanks again. --Jennica✿ / ^talk 08:38, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

@Jennica:  Done -- ferret (talk) 14:48, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

RE: I need a little help!

The ip user is still refusing to provide a source, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kirby_(character)&curid=239693&action=history. --Vaati the Wind Demon (talk) 21:43, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Kirby

All you have to do is look at Kirby's prototype design Popopo(who by the way is clearly wearing shoes)to be able to clearly see that Kirby has red shoes and not red feet.

Nintendo of Europe has gotten way too many things wrong to be trustworthy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.118.21.192 (talk) 22:17, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Feel free to make your arguments at Talk:Kirby (character). It's not particularly strong evidence to point to a prototype design, as that's not Kirby. -- ferret (talk) 22:20, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Unlocking a wiki page

Hello Ferret, I hope that you're having a great day. Would it be possible for you to unlock the Ruamrudee International School page for editing? The user(s) who provoked the edit war has been blocked due to Wikipedia:Sock puppetry (Reference: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Do do doggy). Thank you for your time. SwordMaster191 (talk) 16:00, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@SwordMaster191: I'll leave it locked for now. The editor can easily sock again, and other IPs and editors were also involved. -- ferret (talk) 16:14, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

A User targeting me with personal attacks in an AfD

Hello Ferret, I was wondering if you could assist me over in this discussion as the user Hullaballoo_Wolfowitz has started erroneously attacking me after I warned him about his conduct towards other users. He has also directly accused me of being a troll and then been defamatory in the edit log on his talk page referring to me warning him about his conduct. Could you please warn him so he stops with his attacks? Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 17:23, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@ChieftanTartarus: Take it to ANI if you feel it warrants action. I'm not going to step in and make a call here on my own. There's plenty of admins already involved in that AFD so I'm sure it's been considered. -- ferret (talk) 17:26, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) He could probably calm down a little bit, but it doesn't seem like he's done anything worth taking action over. He shouldn't call you a "troll", but it's not like that alone is blockworthy or something. You're both better off doing the classic Wikipedia mantra of commenting on content, not editors. Sergecross73 msg me 18:22, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

I decided that since he also decided to act defamatory in an edit log on his talk page: [1] referring to me that it warranted taking to ANI. I thank you both however for your assistance. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 18:29, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

• I would just like to point out that the administrators on ANI seem to be more interested in doing nothing and accusing me of causing the issue in the first place rather than taking action. I didn't realise that the admins over there seem to enjoy witch hunting innocents. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 18:39, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

• Yes, that's part of why I didn't recommend going there to begin with. If you're going to ANI, you really want a clear, concise, strong case when talking about personal attacks and civility. You don't really have that here. Its heated conversation, but nothing so bad as to need a block or anything. Sergecross73 msg me 18:51, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm sure you would still agree with me however that the user should have some sort of explanation by the administrators since he did not want to listen to me directly. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 18:53, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Looking over his talk page with the various warnings and notifications would indicate he's well aware already, and is likely knowingly pushing the envelope. Someday, it'll likely get him blocked, but where we're at right now, he hasn't really pushed it that far. Sergecross73 msg me 19:00, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

• I withdrew the complaint and have "retired" Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 19:11, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Unprotection

Can you please un-protect Exodus of Kashmiri Hindus, given that a consensus has been reached at this t/p thread.Regards! ~ Winged Blades^Godric 13:23, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

@Winged Blades of Godric: My apologies but.... Let's wait at least one more day. This dispute has resulted in a total of 3 weeks of full protection being issued. I'd like to give the other editors just a little more time. Ping me again tomorrow if I forget. -- ferret (talk) 13:54, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Hmm....~ Winged Blades^Godric 15:03, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

@Winged Blades of Godric: Done earlier today, forgot to ping. -- ferret (talk) 23:14, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks:)~ Winged Blades^Godric 03:52, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Inexplicable Barn Star Inexplicably Removed... by you...

I know neither why the gesture was made, nor why you acted to redact. Explain your edits to my talk page. Mavigogun (talk) 18:15, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

@Mavigogun: Reverting edits by a sockpuppet. -- ferret (talk) 18:16, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Re DGoodwin

Hello, I was the user who had reported DGoodwin to AIV. I don't believe the user is technically socking, as their prior username User:CofCMAC was only softblocked(giving them the opportunity to register a new valid name) 331dot (talk) 20:41, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

@331dot: The block was for promotion, the other note was just so anyone reviewing could see the past behavior of the other account. That is why I did not tag user page. -- ferret (talk) 20:49, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying. My apologies, thanks for your reply. 331dot (talk) 20:50, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Claude Giroux and the COI

Hello,

Thank for you for blocking the COI. I just have a question. They posted "it is disturbing to family members"[2] and that is why they wanted to content removed. I am wondering what Wiki policy is on this. Keep in mind; this content has been around since 2014, is sourced (I can even add more sources) so their comments about it being false are unwarranted, and it is worded in a neutral manner. The arrest doesn't seem to have affected his salary or his job so I am unsure if it is warranted to be removed under BLP policy. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 00:50, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: Heavily reported in many reliable newspaper outlets, including his apology for the incident. Definitely not false. To be a bit blunt, if family is embarrassed or disturbed by it, they should take it up with him. Not a BLP violation, anymore than reporting any other arrest covered by reliable sources. -- ferret (talk) 00:53, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. I just wanted to confirm. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 00:54, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Hey Feret, I don't know if you or one of your talk page stalkers can look at this. Another IP is blanking parts of the arrest [3] deeming it false. I left them a message and a link to the talk page discussion [4] but it probably is the blocked COI (who is still blocked). HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:29, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: Extended the block on WillyFont for block evasion, and range blocked the current IP set. Trying to avoid protection but let me know if they come back. -- ferret (talk) 20:33, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Re: F1F2F2

I've blocked that account. Thank you so much for bringing this to my attention. - Mailer Diablo 11:36, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Citations on Goblin Sword

Hello.

I believe you've added a tag to my article concerning the verifiably of my page.

I've added a few more citations. Please can you help find more sources. I am trying the best I can to keep the page on Wikipedia.

Thanks CrayonS. CrayonS (talk) 16:19, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@CrayonS: See WP:VG/S for a list of vetted reliable sources for video games. Additionally, there is a Google Custom Search that will search these vetted sites for articles. -- ferret (talk) 16:22, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

OK. I've been checking that out. Thank you anyway. CrayonS (talk) 16:23, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

Thank you for removing one of the tags. I believe the game is notable since it is a video game and I don't think you can really merge it in somewhere. However, it just needs more added content to it.

Thanks CrayonS. CrayonS (talk) 16:31, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@CrayonS: You'll need to read WP:N. Video games are not automatically notable. The lack of a valid merge or redirect target would likely mean it gets deleted, if it were to be discussed. However, I simply tagged it to show concern. I have not submitted to to be discussed for deletion, so its not in any immediate danger. -- ferret (talk) 16:35, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@Ferret Hello, I've briefly read it and will continue more on the Wikipedia notability page.

Thanks CrayonS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrayonS (talk • contribs) 16:37, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

I am making more efforts towards improving the article.

Where is a good place to find help from contributors? Also, is my article good enough to have the tag(s) removed?

Thanks CrayonS. CrayonS (talk) 17:54, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

How do I know if an article is notable enough? I've put as much detail as possible and I think it is enough to establish a page. What do I need to do? Please help.

Thanks CrayonS. CrayonS (talk) 18:37, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@CrayonS: Notability is not based on the state of the article or how much content there is. It has more to do with proving that the topic is notable enough to be included in the encyclopedia. This is demonstrated by how much coverage a topic has received. The issue you have is that this is a mobile game, with essentially nothing but 3 reviews (2 from publications that focus on mobile game releases) all published when the game was released (2014). Since then, there's been no continuing coverage, no indepth information or development stories. This suggests the game had no lasting impact, not even when it first released, and shows a lack of notability. Unless you can find a lot more reliable sources, you may want to focus on a new topic, as this one might not ever make the bar. -- ferret (talk) 18:41, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@Ferret Hello. I've put a MetaScore citation in that might help quite well.

Pocketgamer and Toucharcade are quite good sources as well.

Does my article need more sources to prove of higher interest? Sure, Goblin Sword will never be Minecraft but I believe it has enough attention.

I'm quite new to Wikipedia by the way.

Thanks CrayonS (talk) 11:00, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

Another thing, there are games like Super Hexagon that are articles here.

Anyway, I think Goblin Sword just needs more contributors. It needs significant improvements added anyway (the gameplay is still very unclear).

There are more than a few critics by the way.

I am planning to add more sources.

Thanks. CrayonS (talk) 12:09, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

@CrayonS: There's an argument known as WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Essentially, just because something else exists and seems to have the same issues, doesn't mean it should. It just means no one has gotten to it yet. Super Hexagon however is much more developed as an article, with considerably more sourcing. Keep in mind also secondary reliable sourcing is required to prove notability. Sources from the developer don't count, and not all reviews listed on sites like Metacritic are considered reliable. Many are explicitly considered unreliable. 148apps is considered a very weak source, and applenapps doesn't look reliable. Even if they were, you're still stuck at 4 reviews, from sites that explicitly review or list mobile apps, from 2014, so long lasting coverage is still not demonstrated. -- ferret (talk) 12:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

I agree that two wrongs don't make a right.

I've improved the Goblin Sword article. It looks quite good now.

With sources, how are you judging them?

I am using the Google CSE and that seems to be working well. There are more than a few sources.

As for the review sites, they help establish the game is quite well known.

Sure, this game might not be as popular as what have you out there, such as Minecraft and other things. However, I think it is appropriate to keep.

In textbook, how many sources do you need to establish notability?

I think I need more contributors. How do you get them though?

To be quite honest, I really do care about the page and I'm desperate for it to stay.

Could you help me with my page please by the way? You are very welcome to contribute by adding new things and more sources.

Thanks. CrayonS (talk) 13:50, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

Is a Google Translate of 4Gamer (a Japanese site) suitable for a source?

It's another source I have found that might be possible to add.

Thanks. CrayonS (talk) 14:01, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

If you want more input, you might try posting to the WikiProject Video Game talk page, here. Ask if people would take a look at the article and suggest further sourcing. -- ferret (talk) 14:59, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

Thank you for the links. I am trying to improve Goblin Sword as much as I can.

Thanks CrayonS. CrayonS (talk) 15:20, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Maybe revoke talk page access, too

For [5]. Thanks, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:44, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

 Done Typically check after a little while to see if necessary. Can't start off that way though, have to wait for them to continue. -- ferret (talk) 02:46, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

I figured if they're blocked and the first talk page edit is to reconfigure another editor's name with malicious intent, the benefit of doubt is out the window. Thanks and cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:49, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

And thank you for the blocks at Rockford U. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:50, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

No problem. -- ferret (talk) 02:54, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Curiosity

Just out of curiosity, (and I don't plan on arguing if I "don't like" your answer) why did you elect to fully protect the Billy Meier article? I saw that you deferred to Dlohcierekim on the level, but I was just curious as to why full protection occurred to you. Again, I'm not trying to pick an argument, just trying to get a handle on the thought process of an outside observer. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:17, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

@MPants at work: Both editors involved were close to gaining autoconfirmed, though they weren't quite there yet. In essence, I didn't expect semiprot to stop them long if at all. However, a lesser level is preferred in the end, so I deferred to Dlohcierekim since we could increase it if necessary (Dlohcierekim replied to RFPP that he had planned to defer to me) -- ferret (talk) 16:23, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Hmm, I thought of that, but figured extended-confirmed protection would be the way to go. Just for the record, I would have been fine with full protection, in any case, as the page is fairly stable (which is my very mature and academic way of saying it was on the right version). I appreciate the quick answer! ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:37, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

@MPants at work: True enough, but the wording around ECP is still .... odd, with language about "If semiprot has failed" (which is a weird limitation). I may be taking too literal of a reading of that, I'll definitely give it higher thought in future cases. -- ferret (talk) 16:42, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Nintendo 3DS Page Edit

Hello,

I saw your message regarding my Nintendo 3DS page edits. I was unaware that the information was being removed by another user. When I clicked submit, the added info just disappeared with no explanation why after I clicked submit, and almost immediately as well, my apologies. However, please check the links I reported as they are legitimate articles from Nintendo, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techmaster12 (talk • contribs) 01:56, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Techmaster12: Whether or not the information is true isn't in dispute. Whether the information adds anything of value to the article is. Since your December edit request for the same, you've tried to add this five times now, and been declined or reverted by 3 different editors. Please stop. -- ferret (talk) 02:11, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

History of Pakistan template

Hello, Regarding your edit on this page, it appears you’ve not locked in the version that was the previous status quo prior to this edit, but instead locked the version to one being promoted as one derived from consensus, when such consensus was actually not reached. Thanks for your time! Willard84 (talk) 11:44, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Willard84: See Wikipedia:WRONGVERSION. Feel free to make an edit request for a template editor if you feel consensus is in your favor. -- ferret (talk) 11:47, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ferret: I made a serious point. Please don’t reply with links that make a mockery of questions arising from your decision.Willard84 (talk) 21:54, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Willard84: And I made a serious response. Feel free to make an edit request for a template editor if you feel consensus is in your favor. I have no intention of overturning the current version, work through the talk page. -- ferret (talk) 21:59, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ferret: I was specifically referring to the link you sent that redirects to an article that is meant to be humorous. Perhaps that wasn’t the link you meant to send?Willard84 (talk) 22:02, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

It was quite intentional. -- ferret (talk) 22:02, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

ferret, suggesting the user use the edit request process probably wasn't the best, because every one of the edit request templates requires a consensus to enact a change. (Which there is not one in favor of the requested edit, in this case--I've declined it now.) Maybe point to WP:RFC next time or similar. --Izno (talk) 01:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

151.48.0.0 rangeblock

Hi. I was involved in a cordial discussion at Talk:Dolcè with 151.48.215.96 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), but I see you rangeblocked 151.48.0.0/16 for a "global locked user"; can you share, who is that? Is it the same person who talked with me? In the meanwhile, the latter registered as Piaren (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and asked me a favor on my talk page, so I'm not sure if I should oblige. No such user (talk) 15:43, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@No such user: Blocked. It's apparently an LTA from itwiki and eswiki. Stewards have been involved and global locking them on Meta as well. This user seems like a duck to me. See also Turbetuvb and Asluoer. -- ferret (talk) 16:35, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Reversions to Edits on Watch Dogs

I can understand why you reverted my edits, but surely the fact that it's marked as a GA, doesn't mean there is no room for improvement? I mean, let me list what I'm saying here:

• Lead - It "seems" alright, but surely, per MOS:VG, there needs to be a clear indication of the game's unique gameplay mechanic - hacking - since that should be the most "notable and important" part to be carried through the article? Should we be stating about the game's perspective and how to get around in the lead, when that information should be within Gameplay, as the Lead is meant to give, per the MOS, a "brief summary of the article"?
• Gameplay - Why does this section need to make reference to the main character in it - shouldn't that be left to the Plot? Why do we need to mention the setting in this section - shouldn't it be more a part of the Plot under a sub-section for the setting? Why does it state "The skill tree is upgraded..." when it doesn't clarify what it means by this - surely it should state that the player's character can be improved via upgrades? Do the name of the collectibles have to be stated?

Surely the above should give reason about why I felt the changes were needed - to better improve it. If it had grammar and flow issues, surely those could have been dealt with, rather than reverting? Would you mind just looking over what I'm saying, check MOS:VG, and let me know what you think. GUtt01 (talk) 17:39, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I have to agree with Ferret here, and I would have done the same thing had I caught it before he had. Of course GAs aren't perfect and can be improved upon. But the problem is that your edits were not improvements. You added sentences like Watch Dogs stands out from these franchises with the inclusion of additional gameplay mechanics, most of which centre around hacking. that sound more like an advertisement or PR managers speech than content written for an encyclopedia. Ferret's advice is generally sound - it probably doesn't make sense to do a major rewrite on an article that, just weeks ago, received an extensive multi-editor review in the GA process. I'm not saying there's not things to tweak or improve upon, but a big effort like this is basically "fixing what isn't broken". Sergecross73 msg me 17:50, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@GUtt01: There's always room for improvement, after all its not FA yet :) But I was caught off guard by the idea that a fresh minted GA needed rewriting to such an extent. Additionally, several things read weird, such as starting the gameplay section with "Players conduct both of the game's modes", without having introduced or described two modes. Two relatively large sweeping edits like that, in only two revisions, makes it difficult for me to try to "partially undo" the parts I feel didn't work. Smaller edits would make it easier to handle keeping somethings while reverting others. -- ferret (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Tareq Salahi

Hello. Remember when you blocked an IP who was doing disruptive edits in the article Tareq Salahi? Well, the article rested for a week, but today it started again, and again from an anonymous IP.--EdgarCabreraFariña (talk) 19:35, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@EdgarCabreraFariña: Semiprot 3 months, pretty sustained from several regular IP editors with clear histories. -- ferret (talk) 20:23, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, dude *thumbs up*.--EdgarCabreraFariña (talk) 20:48, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Block evasion

Hey Ferret, I see you blocked St.AidansCbs (talk · contribs). Well I believe they are back at Thomas ShannonCBS (talk · contribs). Similar names and disruptive edits to St Aidan's C.B.S. (Dublin). HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 23:30, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: Blocked. -- ferret (talk) 23:46, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

User:144.121.21.122

Hello, please look into the editing habits of User:144.121.21.122. He/she barged in while I was in the process of creating an article, List of cement manufacturers in Uganda. Reverted my edits twice while I had the "inuse" tag displayed. Left a combative message on my user page, all in a space of about one minute! Very similar behaviur pattern to User:2605:6000:ef43:8500:6416:5727:9160:787a whom you blocked barely 8 days ago, for disruptive editing! Thanks. Fsmatovu 01:16, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@Fsmatovu: Blocked for vandalism. Don't see any real relation to the other IP though. -- ferret (talk) 01:20, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

draft:HALIENE

Hi, would like to delete the page HALIENE (currently redirect) so I can accept Draft:HALIENE and move it to the mainspace. Thank you. L293D (☎ • ✎) 02:35, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@L293D: I'm a little confused. This draft was declined just the other week, and there have been no substantial changes since then to address the reasons why. -- ferret (talk) 02:40, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@Sergecross73: You're more familiar with the music realm than me, if you could handle this one. -- ferret (talk) 02:42, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't think it's ready for the mainspace. It looks to be a pretty big culprit of WP:BOMBARD. A majority of the charts given either fail WP:BADCHARTS (Itunes, Beatport, etc) or isn't really her material. For example, it's misleading to write that "Haliene released a collaborative science fiction-influenced trance album Blueprint", when Blueprint (Ferry Corsten album) is a Ferry Corsten album, not a Haliene album. Looks she has some guest spots in writing and performing but she didn't release such an album. There's problems like that in the prose all over the place too - the whole thing has no narrative or coherent flow, and is just line after line of random name-drops of notable artists and venues associated to her.

There could be a chance at getting it into Wikipedia if that was fixed, and if the few WP:GOODCHARTS that are listed were sourced. (Though, in my search, the only things that came up for WP:USCHARTS was one single song that hit #50 on the Electronic/Dance charts, which isn't really the biggest claim to notability. So I'd be open to change my mind, though at the same time, I can't help but wonder if the reason there's no coherent flow is to mask the fact that she actually hasn't released hardly any music of her own yet, which would make this more of a WP:TOOSOON case. But as is, I can see how AFC rejected it. Sergecross73 msg me 13:54, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@Mar11: As info. I was asked to aid in getting this into mainspace, but I don't see any changes or improvements since your decline just 4 days ago. Serge's comments seem inline with your decline. -- ferret (talk) 13:59, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@L293D, Walru5hunterofficial, and Ronz: Following conversations about this, I noticed that it was discovered by Ronz that Kelly Sweet already exists. I've redirected HALIENE to there. You are free to expand Kelly Sweet with her post-2014 work as Haliene. I'm not sure a histmerge is necessary, since Walru5hunterofficial is the sole editor of the draft, and can simply start merging in the more recent content. -- ferret (talk) 20:15, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I find it funny that you spend so much time shooting down the notability of the artist I wrote such a thorough article for, meanwhile the artist already has a mainspace page! For the time, I think I'll let someone else figure this one out. Thank you for your help!

Walru5hunterofficial (talk) 05:33, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

@Walru5hunterofficial: Not sure what you're talking about, I made no judgement on the notability and have no involvement in AFC reviews. That said, even if notability exists, there's still some valid concerns listed about the draft's content. -- ferret (talk) 13:17, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

If he's talking about me, then I merely notability based off of what was in the draft, and checked if there were any meaningful charting position at Billboard (magazine). If I came to the wrong conclusion about her notability, it was because of the poor quality of the draft itself. That being said, there's some pretty serious concerns with the Kelly Sweet version too. Both seem wildly incomplete - t's not a good sign if a quick glance doesn't reveal that both the article and the draft are about the same person... Sergecross73 msg me 13:35, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

european average wages

there is an edit war on european average wages article because certain elements of users are insistent on using nonsensical sources and calculations that are inconsistent with the others in the article

as in, there's a self-appointed policeman of the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanthWiki (talk • contribs) 20:43, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Both editors issued 3RR warnings. -- ferret (talk) 20:51, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppet account of Benniejets

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Benniejets

Special:Contributions/LittleOx looks to be Benniejets again. I just reported him at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Benniejets.

It's clearly him. Most of his edits are small edits adding or deleting a letter or a word, and many of them were reverting his own changes. Until he gained a decent amount of edits, he started to edit the same pages as the original Benniejets and his tonnes of clones did. Mostly focusing on List of European countries by average wage and adding some false data to them, then Italy and Economy of Italy, amongst others. There is also another 2nd user involved with lots of sockpuppets editing similar articles called Mediolanum. I don't know if they're the same person (might be, very similar writing style and very similar interest in articles) but this LittleOx is clearly either Benniejets or Mediolanum, if they aren't the same person. Just check some of the last confirmed and suspected sockuppets of these main accounts and then compare them to LittleOx, it's way too suspicious. Thanks. --TechnicianGB (talk) 03:05, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

@TechnicianGB: I'm not familiar with Benniejets and am not a checkuser. Will let the SPI run its course. -- ferret (talk) 03:05, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok. Can you warn LittleOx in his talk page that he is a suspected sockuppet of Benniejets and an investigation is being done? Or do I have to do it? (I don't know who has to do it since you're the admin here). --TechnicianGB (talk) 03:08, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

@TechnicianGB: Unlike edit war and admin noticeboards, sockpuppet investigations do not require notification. -- ferret (talk) 03:09, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Template issue

What happens if you add {{DISPLAYTITLE:_NSAKEY}} at the top of the source code in a page called Tic-tac-toe? 206.116.3.207 (talk) 17:57, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @206.116.3.207: '{{DISPLAYTITLE:_NSAKEY}}' is rendered as text on the page, as you have done above. Do you have anything better to do? -NottNott 18:00, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Actually, without nowiki tags, nothing would happen. Wikipedia doesn't let titles different to the page be displayed. -NottNott 18:02, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

How am I disrupting the article Counter-Strike (video game)?

You accuse me of disrupting the article Counter-Strike (video game) for adding a template to cite more sources? I guess you are acting authoritarian Dajo767 (talk) 21:51, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

@Dajo767: Not at all. The warning is for the editing warring in general. Please read WP:3RR. -- ferret (talk) 22:12, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

@ferret Thank you for the response. That edit was due to a couple of simple non-contributory users who watch that page (Counter-Strike (video game)), and by my suspicion also other video-game related artciles, and revert each and every edit done in good faith and common sense for enhancing the quality of the subject article. I am specifically talking about users such as The1337gamer. These users contribute to certain articles concerning older video-games to depilate and possibly become archaic. Concerning this arbitral edits and reverting, I had to insert a template to request additional references for that article. --- Dajo767 (talk) 04:12, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey

user::Lordtobi is violating the WP:SOCK and WP:VD rule, has been requested to C&D but refuses to back down. Politely warn him of reverting my edits that are both backed by reliable sources and are pretty darn on point as well.

Please keep in mind that whatever happens everything I do here is covered under WP:IAR rule, and thus your authority in this matter is limited and questionable, as is anybody elses who stands in between a better wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 0912309w (talk • contribs) 22:29, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

@0912309w: Lordtobi is not socking (I'm familiar with all 3+ editors who have reverted you), nor committing vandalism. I suggest you do some reading on our policies and move on to other useful contributions. -- ferret (talk) 22:31, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Wait wait wait - he said that he is going to revert my version, then a second account with no user page reverted it. How is that not socking? That's the definition of socking. Also the idea that you are familiar with all three is rather unlikely. WP:AGF mod? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 0912309w (talk • contribs) 22:32, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

@0912309w: Because all 3 are long time editors that I've come across in the past. They are not the same person. (Nor by the way are user pages required, lots of editors forego them). As for why multiple editors would revert you so quickly, it's a very popular film with many page watchers. For someone telling people to AGF, throwing around sock and vandalism claims with no evidence is pretty bad faith. -- ferret (talk) 22:35, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes @Deloop82 was a bit faster than I was. Seems weird to immediately assume a sock puppet usage. Lordtobi (✉) 22:37, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

No need to engage this further, user has been given sufficient warnings and advice on how to proceed. Up to them now. -- ferret (talk) 22:38, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Miyakijuria's List of best-selling PC games talk page edit

Miyakijuria (talk · contribs)

There probably was a good reason to revert the edit, but as it's also been hidden I'm now curious what it said? Was it copyvio? Spam? Alexis Jazz (talk) 00:29, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: Deleted under RD3, purely disruptive, and additionally may have been personal information about a minor. -- ferret (talk) 00:31, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Edit undone on WP:Online Game?

Hey, I edited the Wikipedia "Online Game" article to clarify that Forbes said something, not "Online Game Review" (or something of that nature), but then you reverted it. Why's that? No comment was made on the reversion, and I double-checked to make sure what I was listing was right. Might be my bad here but I wanted to make sure. RandomGuyDTB (talk) 14:22, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

@RandomGuyDTB: There was an edit note, see the diff. Forbes was reporting something that Online Game Review stated. Read the actual Forbes article, quote: "The report Online Game Market Forecasts estimates worldwide revenue from online games to reach $35 billion by 2017, up from $19 billion in 2011." -- ferret (talk) 14:27, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ferret: Oh, oops. My bad. Thanks for the help! Didn't see the note. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RandomGuyDTB (talk • contribs) 14:34, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Sierra

Wasn't Sierra reduced to a brand name only when Vivendi Universal Games was founded? The same went for other subsidaries like Universal Interactive and Coktel Studio. Luigitehplumber (talk) 13:37, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

@LTPofficial: Sierra was still a subsidiary when the Activision merge occurred in 2008, and was shutdown shortly after. It was revived as brand-only in 2014. -- ferret (talk) 13:42, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

I know though. What i'm saying is that VU Games treated Sierra as a brand name for games (example, some titles being released under the Sierra name in Europe, but their own brand in North America, and later publishing all games under the Sierra name in 2006) and games released by them would say on the back (this would apply to European PS2 titles) "Published by Vivendi Universal Games" or something like that. Think of it as when Hasbro Interactive and Infogrames reduced MicroProse to a brand name only. Luigitehplumber (talk) 13:50, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

@LTPofficial: In this particular case, some Googling finds that the retail boxes for CSCZ do not seem to do that. Sierra is on the front, and the back's trademark legal text says they are trademarks of Sierra, didn't see mention of Vivendi. It's known as being published by the Sierra division, so we should have that in the infobox. -- ferret (talk) 14:01, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Black Ops 4

If Black Ops III uses the I's, Black Ops IIII should as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StarWars1313 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

@StarWars1313: That's simply not how it works. We go by WP:COMMONNAME. Sources refer to it as Black Ops 4, with the IIII being marketing stylization. -- ferret (talk) 00:19, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

@Ferret: Thank you for the correction, I did not know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StarWars1313 (talk • contribs) 00:25, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

God of War (2018) reception description

Hi ferret,

I was wondering if you could help me out. I'm contesting with fellow user JDC808 the reception description in the article for God of War (2018). He's insisting that we can't quote it having received "universal acclaim according to review aggregator Metacritic", because "universal" isn't accurately reflective (and gave me a link or two to old Help pages [6] [7] advising why the term "Universal" might be discouraged). Instead, he thinks it correct that we summarise the game's reception as being "critical" (based on no specific source) and in addition to what Metacritic says; thus, the prose reads that the game "received critical acclaim, receiving an aggregate score of 95 out of 100 from eighty-two critics as compiled by review aggregator Metacritic, who describe their score as "universal acclaim"". So in one sentence we get both "critical" and "universal" which is unnecessary.

JDC808 has improved several articles to the status of Featured Article (solely pages for the main God of War games, go figure), saying that he was required to do the above in order to get them to Featured Articles, and that this won't be contested by any moderators as a result. For example, similar to God of War (2018), God of War II reads "was universally acclaimed ... 93 out of 100 from Metacritic, who describe their score as "universal acclaim"). Why quote the term twice?

I've always been told that we only need to directly source Metacritic, so if what he's saying is true, why isn't this the correct way, unless it's only changed because it's just required for Featured Articles and nothing else? Wikibenboy94 (talk) 22:56, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

I've changed it and referenced back to MOS:VG. -- ferret (talk) 23:04, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

"go figure" because I'm the "resident God of War maestro" according to Torchiest, and God of War II should not have that. It got slipped in by a random IP that I missed and has now been corrected. When "universal acclaim" is mentioned, it has to be clear that that is Metacritic's description (which is how I had it worded). Remember, we have non-gamers who read this, which is why this was a big deal when getting the previous articles promoted to Featured Article status. I originally thought the same way you did in this regards, but when a non-gamer who doesn't know Metacritic's system reads that statement, they're going to assume it had a perfect score across the board, which is not the case. --JDC808 ♫ 03:42, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

It is clear that it is Metacritic's description. I'm not sure how else you think "according to Metacritic" would be read. This is MOS compliant. -- ferret (talk) 13:05, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

An MOS that doesn't actually address the "universal acclaim" statement. That needs revisited. I'm going to open a new discussion on the matter. --JDC808 ♫ 18:56, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

The difference of opinion here is likely that I don't see why it needs addressed. It's directly attributed to a particular source. -- ferret (talk) 19:28, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Because there are more than just gamers who read Wikipedia. Like I said, I had to deal with this very issue before, and it was because of non-gamers. --JDC808 ♫ 20:05, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Haveibeenpwned

Hi, I noticed that a reference for haveibeenpwned.com was removed from here as an unreliable source. I added that reference as it listed the amount of accounts breached. Haveibeenpwned is generally regarded as an extremely reliable and regarded website in the security industry with its maintainer Troy Hunt carefully preening every breach before adding it to the database (if the breach is even somewhat unreliable he himself adds the unreliable tag; not the case here). I think its good to have that reference there as it provides info into the breach such as the extent of it along with other details. Gotitbro (talk) 23:33, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

@Gotitbro: We generally don't use sources of this nature (No editorial oversight, unclear sourcing, etc), especially if we have a better secondary source to rely on. I'm aware of the site myself, but it's not really a good source here on Wikipedia and is only used in two other articles (And probably should be cleaned up on those as well.) -- ferret (talk) 23:35, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

OK, I see. Thanks for letting me know. Gotitbro (talk) 23:53, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

@Ferret: Can you tell me what tool can be used to see references from a particular source (as you did above for haveibeenpwned)? Thanks. Gotitbro (talk) 11:24, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Simply perform a search on the site's name in the search bar. -- ferret (talk) 11:38, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Fixing up what an IP user did to the Vivendi Games game articles

I've sort of reverted the necessary edits the IP user did, but turned them into notes like I normally do when I edit games that were published by a company that used a brand name. Luigitehplumber (talk) 12:14, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

@LTPofficial: Could you kindly remove these edits you've made? We do not track distributors or who the property is licensed from in the infobox, and the additions are all unsourced as well. The constant inclusion of licensing information was one of the reasons that led to the distributor field being removed in the first place. -- ferret (talk) 12:52, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

The ones I’ve made on the Universal Interactive Studios games released before they became a publishing label for Vivendi Universal Games? If so, okay then. Luigitehplumber (talk) 13:37, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

@LTPofficial: Yes in general, but more specifically edits like these two. Konami published the games, and the field is only for publisher, not distributor or licensor. If the licensor can be sourced, its fine to include in the prose, but consensus is that distributors and licensors do not belong in the infobox. -- ferret (talk) 14:08, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Okay, i'll get rid of them for you. Luigitehplumber (talk) 14:30, 22 April 2018 (UTC) Done. Luigitehplumber (talk) 14:35, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Stefan George edit: How do I cite?

Hey ferret! It's Lightningboltz03. You recently deleted my edit on Stefan George, because it lacked citation. This edit however, was from an academic paper I wrote of Claus Von Stauffenberg earlier this year. Would I cite myself here, or the source I used? Thanks for the help and clarification. ˜˜˜˜Lightningboltz03, April 22, 2018 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lightningboltz03 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

@Lightningboltz03: It would be best to cite the sources you yourself use, otherwise it could be viewed as original research. See Wikipedia:How to cite your sources for more information. -- ferret (talk) 17:23, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Sure. Should I undo your edit? Also, if my point is a little bit too far on the POV side, you can always let me know, no harm done. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lightningboltz03 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

?

Thoughts on this one? CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:24, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

@Chrissymad: Doesn't fit patterns I'm familiar with at the moment, but give me more info and I'll dig. Shoot me a email or Discord message if you prefer. -- ferret (talk) 18:29, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

I do see they hit an article Alex also edited, but I don't think its related. -- ferret (talk) 18:31, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

User:Aaaaaaacp

Thanks for blocking that account. Also be aware of Aaaaaaacpa (talk · contribs), created by the same account (see log). It should probably be blocked as well. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:09, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

@Hammersoft: Blocked. -- ferret (talk) 18:31, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

VGrelease

Thanks, ferret, I understood. But for Superhot there are actually four release dates, and all I did was simply putting a "Collapsible list" to short the infobox. Lone Internaut (talk) 00:56, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@Lone Internaut: I don't know if Superhot needs the collapsible list, but all four dates are single WW dates, hence my message. -- ferret (talk) 01:17, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

WW dates were present before I did my first edit on the article. It will take a while to remove all WW dates on all video games article. Anyway it should need "collapsible list" since there are more platform involved in fuor different release date, so as far as I know should be ok with that. Lone Internaut (talk) 01:44, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@Lone Internaut: Mordecairule removed vgrelease the other day. I've seen you add it back on several articles, that is why I left you message. I have no strong opinion about a collapsible list on super hot. -- ferret (talk) 02:06, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I saw it. Well, I will use again "Collapsible list" then, without WW dates of course. If anyone will oppose, I am sure will make me know. Thank you, again. Bye. Lone Internaut (talk) 02:16, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Todd Howard

Dear Ferret,

 The Todd Howard "Coward" joke, while it may seem idiotic, would engage more people and help them learn about him while they make their edits. It's a harmless joke, and I propose that it is stated that today is a joke day above the false information, to warn those whom are coming to learn of him that this information is false. On behalf of my community, we beg of you to let us have one day of laughter and enjoyment by unlocking this page. We have waited patiently for today to come, all of us in anticipation. Please, Ferret, let us have one day of fun, just one?

Sincerely, APinecone APinecone (talk) 11:47, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

No? Wikipedia is not the place for joking and disruptive edits. -- ferret (talk) 11:49, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

ferret, thanks for your work on helping stop this raid. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 01:11, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. You have been very busy today and your hard work is appreciated. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:57, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Mason Prince

Could you look at Mason Prince (talk · contribs)? You blocked him two weeks ago for persistently adding unsourced content, and he's continuing to do so. See, for example, this edit, which I suspect may be hoax. Neither Variety nor Deadline.com have any hits for this. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: Looks like same behaviors. Gave him a month. Next will be indef probably. -- ferret (talk) 22:16, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Please ban

More Bethesda/Howard vandals:

• 108.48.26.17 (talk · contribs)
• Nique1287 (talk · contribs)
• TakyonDrive (talk · contribs)
• 70.53.158.244 (talk · contribs)
• 120.156.181.201 (talk · contribs)

—Lordtobi (✉) 10:50, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@Lordtobi: Most of these I've already blocked or declined to block due to staleness or warnings being in place. Issued one more semiprot though. -- ferret (talk) 10:52, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Eunhaelover

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 11:27, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@Cahk: Not too big a deal, they are allowed to remove block notices if they want. I'll check later to ensure nothing further. -- ferret (talk) 11:39, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

killswitch engage

i added 2 very reliable sources on killswitch engage’s genres and u still reverted “metalcore” they started metalcore how are they not? Davatki (talk) 20:35, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Use the article's talk page. Neither was a reliable source for genre. Their own website is a primary source, and a list of tags on a site is not actual coverage. -- ferret (talk) 20:39, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

It even says in the musical styles and themes section on their page that they and i quote “primarily play metalcore and heavy metal” they are both metalcore and melodic metalcore Davatki (talk) 20:44, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

i used the talk page. Davatki (talk) 21:01, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

RFA Brambleleaf (1959)

Hi Ferret, Thank you for blocking RedBaron, but you reverted edits on RFA Brambleleaf (1959) to the vandalized state [8]. This passage is vandalism:

"Under the command of Captain Franceso Schettino, she served valiantly in the Second Meditteranean war. On June 7th of 1969, she rammed and destroyed an enemy submarine, the Syrian Glory of Syria. As the submarine was snorkling and not under propulsion, they could not maneuver and were destroyed almost instantaneously. The wreck was discovered in early 2004."

I don't want to undo them without making sure you understand I'm acting in good faith here. --Theredproject (talk) 20:36, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@Theredproject: If I got the wrong diff by mistake (I may have gotten confused due to both users having "Red" in name), feel free to fix. -- ferret (talk) 20:40, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

If possible...

Could it be possible to ban User:Johnnykenny its a vandalism only account that started out with Todd Howard vandalism to Lehigh County, Pennsylvania but has since branched out to general vandalism. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 02:00, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Neil got it. -- ferret (talk) 02:10, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Do page protections ... stack?

Because I've seen some pages related to The Debacle of April 26 that are 30/500-protected until May 2nd. Will the indefinite block come into place by then, or will it have to be reapplied? (Hopefully the Tumblr kids don't take notice.) Greetings. --KDDLB (talk) 05:15, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@KDDLB: Protections do not stack. Protections and Pending Changes do. Don't worry, admins who apply ECP on top of semiprot generally make notes to reapply semi. -- ferret (talk) 11:11, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Yup, if it's the same type of protection (edit protection / move protection / pending changes) then they don't overlap and if semi is changed to ECP or full, when the new protection expires, so does the semi even if it was longer. See User:Anarchyte/sandbox/prottest for an example. I protected the page with semi for an hour and then applied full for 1 minute. When the minute was up, I logged out and tried to edit the page and, lo and behold, I could. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:38, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Article protection request.

Hi am requesting if you could protect the article Alex Hunter (character) i think am in an edit war with some an unregistered user on grounds of persistent vandalism to the artcle. Chabota Kanguya (talk) 16:20, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Icem4k: Current IP blocked, protected. -- ferret (talk) 16:28, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Sock

This guy again. Soft.paradise (talk · contribs). Sock of Lurulu. Block if you can, thanks. --Jennica✿ / ^talk 06:16, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@Jennica:  Done Please review edits. -- ferret (talk) 11:35, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Non-free use of File:Harvest Moon Logo.png

Each use of non-free content is required to have a separate specific non-free use rationale per WP:NFCC#10c and those which are lacking such rationales can be removed per WP:NFCCE. However, as explained in WP:JUSTONE, just providing the missing rationale doesn't automatically mean the non-free use in question is policy compliant. When dealing with non-free logos such as this, Wikipedia's non-free content use policy generally allows such a logo to be used for primary indentification purposes in the main infobox or at the top of the article about the company, organization, etc. the logo identifies; the non-free use of the same logo, however, is much harder to justify per WP:NFCC#1, WP:NFCC#3 and WP:NFCC#8 in other articles or in other locations within the same article. In such cases, it is generally considered that the logo itself needs to be the subject of sourced critical commentary or otherwise significantly improve the reader's understanding of the relevant article content to such a degree that omitting the logo will be detrimental to that understanding. In other words, simply wanting the reader to see the logo is not enough; there has to be a really strong contextual reason for using the file. The way the logo was being used in Story of Seasons#Naming could not really be justified per NFCC#1, NFCC#3 and NFCC#8 since there was no specific discussion of the logo itself and nothing in that particular section which required that reader see the logo (i.e., the content can be just as easily understood without the logo as it can with the logo), so the link to Harvest Moon (2007 video game series) is more than sufficient. If you disagree with this assessment, then please provide the necessary rationale for the particular use explaining why before re-adding the file to the article again. The rationale shouldn't just be something copied and pasted from another use with just the article name paramter changed; it should address how the non-free use in the "Story of Seasons" meets (in your opinion) all ten non-free content use criteria. Providing a non-free use rationale will at least give others something to assess at WP:FFD if they feel the non-free use still doesn't comply with relevant policy. I hope that clarifies why the file was removed. If you have any questions, you can ask them here. If you want some other opinions, you can ask for help at WP:MCQ and WT:NFC. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:45, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I'm not terribly vested in it, but I do feel the fact that 24 out of 26 games in the series using the logo, coupled to the confusing "series split" between the publishers, with an entire section dedicated to such, provides quite a bit of context for why the logo was there. Note also, per a recent long drawn out move discussion, that Harvest Moon (series) as primary topic redirects to this page. I do believe readers expect to find and see a Harvest Moon logo on this page. -- ferret (talk) 13:03, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Though I also see it was recently added here, so I'm neutral. -- ferret (talk) 13:08, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

It often seems that when articles are merged/moved/redirected that those doing the merging/moving/redirecting give little consideration as to how it might impact any non-free content (if any) being used in the article. Anyway, as posted above, if someone believes that the non-free use of that particular file in that paricular article is justified, then that person just needs to provide the non-free use rationale for the use before re-adding the file to the article. Then, if anyone disagrees with that assessment, they can either tag the file with {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} or start a discussion about non-free use at WP:FFD. Without such a rationale, however, the non-free use clearly fails WP:NFCC#10c and the file can be removed per WP:NFCCE. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:47, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Minecraftgamerpc69

This user has 178 edits, beginning in November 2017. The account name already implies a joke account, but aside from that matter, their primary edits are adding unfounded, unsourced and purely incorrect information, often inconsistent with their previous edits. For example:

[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57]

Disruptive image-swapping edit warring (what they are currently blocked for) has also not been rare. For example:

[58][59][60]

[61][62][63]

[64][65]

[66][67][68]

[69][70][71][72][73]

[74]

[75][76][77][78] (you've been involved in this one too)

Also check out their Commons uploads (including "Half-life 3.png"). The few, one-hand-countable apparently-good-faith edits don't make up for this obvious joke account and it should be blocked indefinetly on grounds of WP:NOTHERE. Lordtobi (✉) 22:52, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

I've no doubt that we'll end up with a final indef block for WP:CIR, but I try to give people enough chances. All of the edits are clearly good faith, there's no vandalism mixed in. -- ferret (talk) 13:07, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Doing well on wikipedia and fixing stuff Mtdacca (talk) 06:52, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Yet again

Hello F. This previously blocked IP 47.196.77.200 (talk · contribs) has gone right back to the same problematic editing that led to the previous blocks. Thanks for your time. MarnetteD|Talk 19:23, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: Blocked again, please review edits. -- ferret (talk) 19:30, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Will do. Many thanks. MarnetteD|Talk 20:17, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Source

On https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cagalli_Yula_Athha I’m curios what the issue was? As I stated it’s in the source, so I don’t understand what the reason was? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:640:24A0:202C:5EEC:ACA9:C46D (talk) 02:34, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Read WP:BRD and use the article's talk page to discuss the change you want. Edit warring across multiple IPs is disruptive. -- ferret (talk) 02:47, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

What do we do if we can’t reach common ground? I stated my reasoning multiple times but they didn’t seem content.2600:100C:B228:3758:FD5C:B82F:CBD4:18A6 (talk) 03:04, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

New nation in World of Tanks

Hello ferret, about the Italy in World of Tanks, the new nation has been released last week, so... can you add that one, cause I can't edit that one.

Also, additional in wiki in that same page, from WG Asia said: "In March 2017, Korean Server has been shut down, and merged to Asia Server once more."

Thanks for advance.

-a player from Asia Server. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AntiDilawz (talk • contribs) 15:02, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

I'd need a source for either of these to be added. Is there an official example somewhere? That would be a start. Better would be some coverage in a secondary source that a new nation was added, etc. -- ferret (talk) 15:05, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for indef protecting Bol's page. I feel that protectors are never keen to apply indefinite, even though it's clearly needed on some articles. Etzedek24 ^{(Would it kill ya to leave an edit summary?)} 00:34, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

@Etzedek24: I often lean towards a 1 year in these cases but there's substantial history including a previous indef that was lowered. -- ferret (talk) 00:35, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

AH

I'm thinking going forward we should just document it on the LTA page lol.CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 23:24, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Just a run of the mill sockmaster. LTA pages require a bit more than poor BLP edits and block evasion. We've been blocking Lurulu for years. -- ferret (talk) 23:26, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

I have no preference on the venue of tracking it, but feel free to report him to me as much as you want. I've had to block disruptive users like him for years on end in the past. It's no big deal, and I've got an infinite tolerance for it by now. Sergecross73 msg me 00:51, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Oh no, I meant just in user space, not a real LTA page. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:41, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Dark Souls III

Please specify which resources are unreliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ksgmsg (talk • contribs) 16:48, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

@Ksgmsg: I saw several uses of Wikia. Any open wiki site is an unreliable source (Wikipedia itself is). Additionally there was a fair amount of gamecruft, such that our MOS is against, see WP:VGSCOPE. There were also other syntax and formatting issues. -- ferret (talk) 18:14, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Tribes Vengeance page

Hi Farret, I understand that you want to edit the page to what you want but This is the right page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribes:_Vengeance for Tribes Vengeance before you edited it and please don't edit it so people can download the game and know more information about it: like characters. No one can download the game from mobygames website or Tribesuniverse website. By the way it is not my page but I found its source and pasted it. it is the perfect page for Tribes Vengeance thanks to the guy who put it on Wiki with that page a lot of people will know the game and download it.

The page was made / or modified on 13 February 2012, at 22:11 -(You won't find that on history)- and then you edited it by removing much information about it like: Characters and putting your links which doesn't help.

So please don't edit the right page for Tribes Vengeance.

It was the main page for Tribes Vengeance until you edited it.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A129873654A (talk • contribs) 17:51, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

I left a message on your talk page, but you cannot just revert articles to versions from 6 years ago. There's a pletheroa of issues, including restoring bad sources, unsuitable content (WP:VGSCOPE), and breaking templates that have changed syntax since that time. Copy and pasting other sites onto Wikipedia is also potentially a copyright violation, including from Wikia. -- ferret (talk) 18:11, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

How do I know that you have the right to edit the main page of Tribes Vengeance? And why do you edit the main page every time ?! I don't understand! Don't you want the people to get the game?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A129873654A (talk • contribs) 18:15, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

@A129873654A: Everyone has the right to edit Wikipedia, no one owns an article. This is an article about Tribes Vengeance. It is not the webpage for Tribes Vengeance, and it is not meant to be a game guide, how to guide, or way to download the game. -- ferret (talk) 18:19, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Why do you edit Tribes Vengeance page? You are putting links that don't help! Tribes Universe copy causes error 1305 while installing!!! and MobyGames doesn't give tribes vengeance for free!!! And why do you delete all that?! Characters and X2 bonus pack sections .... ETC you are removing the history of the game!!!!

The page which I put is better than yours...

Just tell me why do you edit the page to a useless page? I don't know how to talk on the same topic so I make new topis sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A129873654A (talk • contribs) 18:28, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok at least put the useful links of the game 1- TribesRevengeance.net 2- http://library.theexiled.pwnageservers.com/file.php?id=2930 — Preceding unsigned comment added by A129873654A (talk • contribs) 18:45, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

@A129873654A: You're right, that Tribes Universe link shouldn't be there. The MobyGames link is fine. The two links you've provided are inappropriate for Wikipedia. I'll say this again because you seem to have not understood: Wikipedia is not a how-to for playing or installing the game. We do not provide links to install games. -- ferret (talk) 19:48, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Wait, Are you moderator or admin or .... important person for wikipedia?

You look like that you are a moderator or admin or Important person for wikipedia ..... that explains why you locked my edited pages in history and I thought you are a normal person like me so I kept editing the page ...... By the way I have read that from the link you sent me.

I agree with the new changes then, Sorry because I was harsh about editing Tribes Vengeance page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A129873654A (talk • contribs) 21:04, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I'm an administrator. But what I am telling you would be said by any experienced editors, and any of them would be in the right to have reverted your edits. -- ferret (talk) 12:37, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

2602:252:D06:1790:0:0:0:0/64

2602:252:D06:1790:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

The disruptive edits coming from this IP range have continued after your previous 1 month block, would you mind blocking them again? Thanks. 36.73.126.43 (talk) 01:52, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done -- ferret (talk) 12:37, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Dark Souls redirect

Hi. I was just confused since best video games ever released was a new redirect page created just for this article. I was wondering if it meets the notability of redirect pages. Interqwark (talk) 20:18, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

@Interqwark: It's certainly a plausible redirect and valid. -- ferret (talk) 21:00, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

All right. Thanks. Sorry for my confusion. Interqwark (talk) 21:00, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

I already explained this to you on your talk page... ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:33, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for my confusion. Interqwark ^{talk contribs} 06:20, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Tetris

I'll try an' find another, mate. Maybe you can, too? Regards.--Kieronoldham (talk) 02:09, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

@Kieronoldham: After being unsourced for over 7 years, better to just remove it. The source you had clearly copied several sections of the Wikipedia article word for word, around 2014. -- ferret (talk) 02:10, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Just checked and thanked. In my humble opinion (and maybe the Wiki Teahouse et al should be alerted to this), all unclaimed/unfulfilled citation tags greater than, say, 2 years, should be cached and treated with priority on the CN page as opposed to those two days or two months old. Food for thought. Regards, Kez.--Kieronoldham (talk) 02:14, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Doomguy/the Doom Slayer

Regarding this revision of yours, if Doomguy and the Doom Slayer are fan names, why is the article titled Doomguy? Does Wikipedia accept fan-made names for characters? Interqwark ^{talk contribs} 12:29, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME. Articles have to have a name, and we use what is commonly referred to in reliable sources. The character itself is unnamed in the lore, but reliable sources (and fans) refer to him as Doomyguy. Doom main character (Or something similar) would not be what readers expect. (feels like I've had this conversation in the past) -- ferret (talk) 12:38, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Understood. Thanks for explaining. Interqwark ^{talk contribs} 12:43, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Mr. Bones Music credits

I was hoping to add the songs and music credits to the Mr. Bones game since adding the Mr. Bones soundtrack (a Ronnie Montrose album) is not currently an option. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobglickman (talk • contribs) 16:21, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

@Bobglickman: We do not include tracklists for non-notable sound tracks in video game articles, per WP:VGSCOPE #15, a part of the Manual of Style guidelines. Infobox video game does not contain fields for albums or succession. Infoboxes each have specific fields available to them, and the video game and album infoboxes differ. It would be best to just include the information that he wrote for this game and released the soundtrack in his own article, if proper sourcing exists. -- ferret (talk) 16:25, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobglickman (talk • contribs) 17:15, 1 June 2018 (UTC)