User talk:Kung Fu Man/archive2

I noticed that you have recently redirected this page. I do hope that you will be updating the entry on List of Tetris variants and im a bit surprised that this redirect wasnt previously discussed on the articles talk page. please correct me if i am wrong. Salavat (talk) 12:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Im not planning on updating anything so its up to you. I mostly deal with images, got an orphaned message bout the game's cover, thats what brought my attention to the change. Thanks, Salavat (talk) 13:52, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

KFM, I would like to congratulate you and say "thank you" for not senselessly edit warring or reverting when it came to the EarthBound (series)/Mother (series) article, and actually taking the time to find sources to back your claim; cheers. PeanutCheeseBar (talk) 13:13, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Category:Fighting game mechanics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Image:Reubenkee.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Reubenkee.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Polly (Parrot) 01:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think we should look at certain Mario, Pokémon, and other series character articles should be unmerged? If so, we should check up on some of them, and check if there are any sources for notability. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a reminder, please start a discussion before restoring any articles. Just link to your sandbox in a new discussion when you think it is ready. TTN (talk) 17:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With Mewtwo, I think your time would be better spent working on the list entry and the two films. The first film definitely has FA potential and the second one may or may not cap at GA. Working on the list could also potentially lead it to FL status. Most of what you're using as reception comes from the film anyways. If you're definitely set on reviving it, you should definitely remove some of the more useless things like the "Kangaroo with a pot belly" quote. Creation sections should always filled with information directly from the creators. You should also avoid using every possible quote out there just to fill the reception section. You should probably try to find more reputable sources and blend it better. I really suggest working on the other articles, but remember to start a discussion before attempting to revive it. TTN (talk) 21:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm more interested in having as many decent fiction related articles as possible. If I actually believed that the article could flourish, I would be right behind you. Right now, the main selling point of the article is a collection of minor quotes that you could obtain for pretty much an major character of fiction. Even worse, they are from really minor sources. It's not just about having quotes. They have to form together to show that they're something more than a minor part of the films overall reception; they need to have weight. Otherwise, pretty much any film character could have an article just based on quotes rather than the weight of the quotes. As it stands, it would be better to stick some of them in the main film article.

As for the lists becoming featured, if List of Metal Gear Solid characters is still the standard, it should be quite possible. Not every entry has to have something to establish independent notability; it just has to show it overall. It might be harder for some than others, but that list should be able to work out. Then if you focus your attention on the films, there can two more strong articles as well. TTN (talk) 12:53, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much all recent film characters are discussed much more throughly than that. By digging through the reviews, you could easily gather up dozens upon dozens of quotes commenting the actor's portrayal, the character itself, the use of the character in the plot, and various other minor things. Why then, are most of them contained within the main film articles? The weight from those quotes is just not enough to truly break them out. Instead of just dumping everything, they are weaved into the context of main article. That's the case here. Minor context should be applied to the end of the film paragraph, and the rest should go towards the films. That's just the weight the character carries. That's the last I'll mention of it if you want, though.

As for the list conversation, I don't really understand your point. There is no need for featured lists to point to other articles if that's what you think. As long as it is deemed comprehensive enough, it'd be fine. There's no absolute guarantee that it would pass, but I imagine there's a good chance. TTN (talk) 22:53, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I personally think that the Game Boy game is so notable that it's earned the right to have the main (handheld game) title. I wouldn't object to a disambig for the other handheld games on the top. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never hurts to voice an opinion. Once Sam and Kirill voted against me, I would have been surprised to see FloNight disagree. There are a few more arbitrators left to vote.Kww (talk) 19:18, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you merging so many Baldur's Gate Articles? your basically deleting articles that have adequate detail and sourcing? What gives you the right?

Dumoren (talk) 08:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw in the SFIV talk page you said some things about the usual crap from Ono.

In all fairness, what's your POV on this man?

Because I think we might have similar stances on him.--Kim Kusanagi (talk) 17:55, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I actually thought it might be worth it :) I have a more easy going approach to GA status, if it looks good, nominate. But I still think you are close and should give it a run. Remember, it's not FA! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Sagat-gohibiki.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I noticed that you never actually assume good faith when it comes to my edits to reduce the amount of plot summaries and in-universe perspective in the articles, as I can tell by the last few potshots you've taken to me. Instead, you're encouraging to this site into a database of "fictional character biographies" filled with original research and talk about a "canon" which might not even exist. And now you're threatening to ban me by invoking 3RR.

The reason why I removed the link to the Slam Masters article from the template is because NONE of the characters have ever actually appeared in a Street Fighter, outside of some obscure doodle of Birdie with Titanic Tim and some one-off mentions of the characters in Hugo's 2nd Impact, which to be honest aren't really notable enough to warrant including a link to the article. You're putting to much emphasis on a fictional backstory which are meant to be jokes by the developers and aren't that important to the gameplay of the games.

Most of these Street Fighter character articles are in pretty pathetic shape right now. If I tag the articles with an in-universe tag, people will complain that I'm just tagging for the hell of it. And if I rewrite to reduce the in-universe perspective and unneeded sub-sections like "Personality" and "Character relations", then people will complain that I'm removing content.Jonny2x4 (talk) 04:00, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That scan cleared a few things in my mind. It says they were made into transvestites because "hitting women is (considered) rude" (onna o naguru wa keshikaran) in America. It doesn't specifically says that Capcom USA made that objection though. It also says he's one of two transvestites in the game (specifically mentioning Roxy to be the other). Which means whoever did the character translations in Capcom Classics Collection screwed up. Jonny2x4 (talk) 17:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note, do you happen to have Game Over by David Sheff. It mentions a conversation between an American playtester and one of the Japanese designers who did the SNES port. Basically, the play tester mentioned that all the enemy characters were minorities and then complained about the scantily-clad women. The Japanese designer then pointed out that Roxy and Poison were men ("oh you mean the transvestites"). If you compare the SFC and SNES versions, you'll notice that some of the enemy characters have lighter skin tones in the US version. Jonny2x4 (talk) 18:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I seriously need to get ahold of that book. If only for that segment, plus other stuff. Here's a transcript of the page I took from an FAQ. [1]

With Capcom USA, [Howard] Phillips's team edited some of the grislier
games that came in from its Japanese parent company, although Capcom's own
censors weeded out the most offensive touches...When a Capcom USA
representative suggested that it was tasteless to have the game's hero
beat up a woman, a Japanese designer responded that there were no women in
the game. [Here it comes. - Ed.]
'What about the blonde named Roxy?' the American asked. 
The designer responded, 'Oh, you mean the transvestite!'
Roxy was given a haircut and new clothes."
- P 225, Game Over: How Nintendo Conquered the World, David Sheff. 1st
    Vintage Books Edition, 1994.

It seems to suggest that the original designers already made him into a transvestites before the suggestion that it was tasteless.Jonny2x4 (talk) 18:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a few statements here and there that are indications of original research such as "from what little is known through screenshots and gameplay videos of Capcom Fighting All-Stars, her gameplay in the game would have been extremely similar, sans weapons". How would you know just for looking at preview videos? Another example "The canonical successes of these ventures has never been confirmed, though Hugo is stated to be considered "legendary" by Kyle Travers in Final Fight: Streetwise." If its never brought up in another game, why bother mentioning it in the first place? Its an indirect original research.

Also, the scan you've sent to me from All About Capcom Fighting Games doesn't seem to mention half of the stuff cited to the book in the article. Which page did the scan sent to me came from anyway? Jonny2x4 (talk) 02:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should have the scans somewhere on my e-mails if they haven't been deleted. IIRC, the manual doesn't say much interesting about her other than "he's a stylish transvestite who maintains his slender figure in street fights" and "his long legs gives his kicks good range". The scan you've sent is hardly a "biography". Its more like a list of fighting game-related appearances. It glosses over her origin in Final Fight, but mostly talks about her cameos in the Alpha and SF III games, as well as her sole playable appearance in FF Revenge. Jonny2x4 (talk) 03:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I still think all the worthwhile citations like AAC, Game Over and that interview should just be merged into Final Fight. Compiling a list of in-universe trivia like the character's height, weight, favorite food and shoe size aren't enough to make the article notable by itself. I mean the article as it is right now is bloated with more trivia than the official scan you sent to me. And that official scan goes by a rough real-world order (Alpha, SF III and FF Revenge)Jonny2x4 (talk) 04:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For what its worth, the Japanese Wikipedia article on Final Fight (ja:ファイナルファイト) states that Poison was made female in the Final Fight Revenge, but was changed back to male in the Japanese localization of her ending. This seems to be consistent with Ono's statement about her gender. Jonny2x4 (talk) 15:36, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because he's romantically interested at Cody. The book states that he "might" had gotten a "sex change", not that he actually did as if "can he get that sex change operation he wants". Its more of a commentary on her romantic feelings for Cody than her gender per se.

If you know Japanese half as well as I do, you'll know the Japanese language is structured so that it doesn't require gender-based pronouns like "he" and "she" as much as English does. Which is a bitch to be honest when it comes to translate transvestites/transsexual characters like this. Which is why most translated character profiles regards to Poison as a she. I used "he" myself.Jonny2x4 (talk) 15:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That blog seems to contradict Game Over a bit, which seems to suggest that the idea of "not hitting women" was Capcom USA's idea and not Nintendo's. I'll stick to Game Over, since its more reliable. Jonny2x4 (talk) 01:57, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Once you source the plot section and fill the reception section, you will have a very strong Good Article candidate, great job! Keep it up, barnstars may be in your future :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:03, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I know your busy, but this article is already like A-class, and would breeze through GA. Could we please nominate it so we will be a step closer with the 50 FA/GA articles for the Final Fantasy project? Pretty please? :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought I'd let you know I've added some comments to your peer review request for the above list. Thanks, Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 15:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hello KFM how are ya good morning... I see you like computer video games characters do you have a list of incomplete characters that I could look at? I'am happy to help thanks --TheGreenGorilla (talk) 04:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit done: [2]. Hope this helps! Cheers —Giggy 08:31, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Final Fantasy VII (Famicom)
• Final Fantasy Legend
• Poison (Final Fight)

You should push these to FA, as they basically would need slight expansion and a copyedit. That would be awesome. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:57, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• All the pagemoves are making me dizzy. @.@ JuJube (talk) 02:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • No apologies necessary, it's work that needed to be done eventually... JuJube (talk) 04:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop vandalizing my talk page with your: You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Pokémon Red and Blue. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. You are an active participant in the discussions over the content of that page, and you reposted the above template after I'd made no changes to the page at all.MKULTRA333 (talk) 02:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to note that that was not vandalism, it was a legitimate warning, as you, MKULTRA333, were disruptively edit warring on the article. Artichoker^[talk] 03:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Orig-alleyway-art.PNG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although I'm not opposed to moving a lot of Tekken's character pages to a more generalized page, the "Minor" Tekken character page is not the one to do it with. We need a whole new page dedicated for combatants. King Zeal (talk) 01:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about we merge them all into a general "Tekken Universe"-themed page? King Zeal (talk) 01:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which characters in particular are we speaking of? The new guys, gag characters, and minor players are obvious, but what about people like Heihachi Mishima or Paul Phoenix? King Zeal (talk) 01:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just found this on Google books, Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals by Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman. A definitely reliable source with two pages of information and comments on the game and its design. Jappalang (talk) 11:27, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have copyedited the Gameplay section, trying to make the text clearer to the casual reader. Along the way, I have removed certain information that did not seem to be sourced and seemed trivial (i.e. overly detailed). Please take a look over, and revert or make changes if you disagree with the changes or if I have messed things up (my advance apologies if so). Jappalang (talk) 07:59, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problems, worry not. The FAC was nominated by you, so the primary decision of how the article looks at this time should be yours. Jappalang (talk) 22:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On July 20, Fasach Nua raised doubt over Image:Alleyway-balls.PNG at WP:PUI but forgot to tag the image. You should take a look at the issue. Jappalang (talk) 04:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please check out WP:MOS-JP before attempting to translate / transliterate Japanese to English in articles. It's important to remember that semantics and spelling do not call for references simply in titles or names; instead you should reference the respective MOS of the source language. 74.242.122.25 (talk) 18:15, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe what you said that Critical Finish should be removed in the Soul Calibur characters but how 'bout it? People just keep putting them back and they're not even citing any source or whatsoever. Is there still any solution to this? --JCD ^(Talk) 07:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping out cleaning articles. But dude, I think I'll be stopping for a moment now. Many might sue me afterwards lol. Thanks again.--JCD ^(Talk) 05:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. I have commented there. Cheers, Artichoker[talk] 02:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If possible, could you try to search for some actual sources for the article? I imagine that there should be some potential, but the content is mostly complete junk. I don't really even know if there is anything good at all. TTN (talk) 17:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you haven't noticed, I don't list the article amongst ones I've worked on. I haven't written anything like that since Alleyway's article, and I'm not interested in being bothered with it: it's just a memento of the past and a dead engine.

Btw guess it shouldn't hurt to tell ya, managed to get Necrid to B-class now after a night's work on the article (all reviews cited were in turn cited by metacritic) and Ivy's up to C, and there's still more coming. Just hoping this makes you consider you could be wrong about all of the Soul series character not being notable :P--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just figured that you would have some interest in it. The topic seems to deserve some kind of coverage, but I really don't know if there is much of anything to really establish notability. There doesn't seem to be a decent merge target either. I guess I'll probably just stub it for now or something. Anyways, I still find those pretty "meh". Necrid's development would be good to include in the SCII article along with anything on the console specific guest characters. Two or three sentences of the reception should be taken also. Just because they're collected on MC, it doesn't really mean that they're good enough to cite here. The sources dealing with Ivy seem too indiscriminate and somewhat trivial. The blogs should have absolutely no weight there, and the awards aren't really too great. I'm just voicing my opinion, so feel no need to reply to that. TTN (talk) 15:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey dude, LTNS. Anyway, I believe this should get your attention. If you want to comment and help out, that would be great. Thnx. ZeroGiga (talk) 22:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yay! —Giggy 23:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about Captain Obvious ongoing. Feel free to contribute Here --FilmFan69 (talk) 21:27, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated Final Fantasy Legend, so i'll deal with any issues that come up, should be really easy. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as long as I have your word on it, fine...if you were anyone else, I would take great offense to having both my nominations pulled, but since it's you, :) It's all good. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Offhand, the shortest and simplest (which often turns up to be the best) name for such a section I can think (you thought of it in another form as well) of is "Sex symbol". It is not needed to be very specific on section names. A slightly broader terminology can spark off other ideas. In this case, a "Sex symbol" name allows you to talk of how the gamers and media make Ivy out to be an object of sex appeal, and the criticisms that follow. Do not worry too much about there being no precedents because precedents are created by people, and that person might be you. If anyone objects to the title or format, he or she will raise it up at a review (if he or she participates). Of course, if we want to be more specific, the title "Video game sex symbol" can be used instead (some one might want to point out that it is mostly the gamers who notice her).

Do not fret over your remarks. I was silent afterwards because the Marty's follow-up well explained the reasoning for commercials being the commercial property of companies (hence, non-free content). Anyway, the files in the Internet Archive: Moving Images should be carefully used (if at all). Although they remove any blatant copy-violations (and any complained upon), they host videos that are considered "fair-use" by them. Linking to their "fair-use" videos would not be prudent (per your comment that anyone could upload a video). Jappalang (talk) 22:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Zangief-alpha.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Edmund Honda.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]