User talk:Goodraise/Archive 4

Not that bad

Around 4.4K views for this DYK. We did well after all. Cheers ;) --KrebMarkt (talk) 18:54, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Guess so. 'Twas even more than 5K, depending on how you

count. Goodraise 19:18, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey, long time no chat. I just finished rewriting

Ye, it's been a while. You even "retired" at some point, didn't you? I'm not as active anymore myself, but sure thing: I'll look it over for you as soon as I find the time. Goodraise 21:29, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Haha, story's not quite as interesting as it sounds, and yeah, I can't sustain activity for as long as I could back then. Take your time, there's no real rush for FLC; I look forward to your review.

ɳOCTURNEɳOIR^♯♭ 22:48, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

See Talk:List of Spice and Wolf episodes#Requested review. Goodraise 20:26, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm slow too... I've just attempted to clarify the plot as best I can. Hopefully it makes sense now.

ɳOCTURNEɳOIR^talk 01:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 18:02, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

	The Anime and Manga BarnSakura Award
	I award you this BarnSakura in recondition of your contributions to anime and manga articles during 2010 and because everyone deserves a little recondition every once in a while. ;) —Farix (t | c) 13:15, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Note: Replied to at

WT:ANIME. Goodraise 16:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 18:01, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		For demonstrating an excellent response to a complicated discussion here. Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 16:20, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi. The diplomacy barnstar is typically "awarded to users who have helped to resolve, peacefully, conflicts on Wikipedia", but even though this one is not yet resolved, I am so impressed with your approach to it that I just had to say so. :) I like the way you cordially and collegially get to the point, providing the guidance that may be necessary to help another user engage in the project constructively. So, well done! <clap clap> I hope it proves successful. :) --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 16:20, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Nice to feel appreciated once in a while. :) Goodraise 18:19, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 20:46, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

I implemented the new style you showed of citing volumes in List of Naruto characters. It looks very good! Anyway, do you think it would work with the Fullmetal Alchemist lists as some volumes also contain Gaiden chapters apart from the regulars and do not use volume titles? Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 02:41, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Glad you like it. Though I'm still not satisfied. When citing a page number, one must specify which version the number is referring to. And that just looks clusmy like this.[

Gaiden chapter: "Daughter of the Dusk—Prologue".

Lack of volume titles isn't really a problem, since {{gnn}} doesn't take care of the reference numbering and its |ref= parameter is freestyle. You could do it like this:

Volume No. 24: Vol. 24 (ch. 21–24): March 7, 2001. ISBN XXX-X-XXXX-XXXX-X. (in Japanese). and August 1, 2004. ISBN XXX-X-XXXXX-XXX-X. (in English).

In any case, there's still massive room for improvement. Suggestions and criticism more than welcome. Goodraise 04:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I find this one better as it links to the specific volume noted. Maybe placing a "p. #" or "pp. #" for plural would help to explain readers it is referring to a page. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 15:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, there's nothing stopping you from doing it like that.^{[vol. 24, p. 16]} Much like {{rp}}, {{gnr}} allows for a variety of styles. Something else: Do you think there should be a space after the period,^{ch. 84} like this?^{vol. 13} Goodraise 01:58, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I suppose considering the size it has in the articles.Tintor2 (talk) 02:29, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you in favor of the space after the period or in opposition to it? Goodraise 02:32, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

In favor.Tintor2 (talk) 15:09, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 20:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Relevant diffs: [1] and [2] Goodraise 20:44, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello,

I received a CCI Notice from you for my latest Wiki edits. I work as the PR for a magazine and I have been editing our news onto Wikipedia, but apparently I have violated some rules by doing so. I think I was confused before as I thought if I completely cited our website as well as directly linking the exact news article I posted information from would suffice as a proper citation. I have re-edited my earlier posts, in hopes of editing the Wiki pages in an appropriate manner. From this point on, if I were to refer to our news articles as a source of information and re-write our news in a Wiki edit, would it be possible to have this CCI Notice revoked? I apologize for still being unfamiliar with all the editing rules on Wikipedia and violating these rules, but now that I am fully aware of my errors, I would greatly appreciate it if I could be forgiven for my errors and given another chance to properly contribute to the Wiki pages.Ohhellomai (talk) 09:21, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt response & withdrawal of the notice. I will review the pages and information you have sent me soon.Ohhellomai (talk) 11:31, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 20:38, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

This has officially gotten out of hand with me and gwern and I can't figure out how to report. Can you tell me how or go someplace to do it?Lucia Black (talk) 05:01, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

That depends on what you want to report. I don't know what is going on between you, because I'm not following you around. As I see it, your options at this point are as follows:

• Look for the answer yourself. It should be somewhere in Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
• Tell me what happened and I'll advise you further.
• Go directly to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, tell them what happend and ask for help.

Going straight to ANI is certainly the easiest option, but probably not the best. Goodraise 16:32, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Usually for incivility shown here. Lucia Black (talk) 21:41, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I see. Well, whatever comes next, first we should try to talk with him about it. Just tell me the next time he makes such a comment to you, okay? Don't worry, we'll get this worked out. Goodraise 08:43, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

I have no hope of this ending well....I just want to report it. Because its gone long enough, and his version of uncivility is based on things that wikipedia doesn't cover. This is annoying and I'm sincerely thinking this is WP:OWN.Lucia Black (talk) 17:19, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 20:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

At Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Latin Grammy Award for Album of the Year/archive1, you opposed by saying that it "Fails criterion 1" but didn't elaborate. For prose-based opposes, those of us who are directors like to see some examples provided that show a failure of the criterion. It adds weight to an oppose and helps us in our decision-making. If you get the opportunity, please consider returning to the FLC and posting a few representative weaknesses in the list. Thanks. Giants2008 (Talk) 19:42, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate your taking the time to inform me. That said, I am aware of how decisions are made at FLC and I'm content with my opposes being given less weight when I provide fewer details than is common practice. Regards, Goodraise 20:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

"I don't use a screen reader, but I suspect users of such software are likely to miss explanatory text to a table if that text is stored in the very last line of that table." this is a very good point. Would you prefer to see it as a key at the top of each section that uses such symbology? Surprising that it's not been picked up before. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:43, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that would be preferable. Goodraise 18:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll raise it at DISCOGSTYLE and see what our resident ACCESS expert has to say about it. It's a great spot. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:03, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I suppose. Just being my usual, overcritical, nitpicking self. Goodraise 20:35, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

It looks like User:RexxS has responded at the FLC, perhaps, if you haven't already, you could see what you think of his explanation. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:28, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Commented there. Goodraise 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 18:06, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Relevant diff: [3]. Goodraise 18:06, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, Goodraise, no need for apologies or a cookie, but thanks nevertheless. I have no issue with anything you've brought up, and I'm sorry to read that you have "dissatisfaction over the FLC process". Is there anything specific that we need to do better? I'd hate for this to turn into a counselling session, but there's no way I'd want one of most senior contributors to harbour some kind of issue without us getting an opportunity to perhaps do (or at least, start to do) something about it, improve the process and make it better for all. Times at

Good to know I didn't step on too many toes. My usual reaction, when I realize my contributions are colored by an emotional state, is for me to get away from editing for a while. That's what I'm doing now. Of course I'll be back though. And of course I will, as I have planned for quite a while now, bring my thoughts to discussion at WT:FLC, but only after I've sorted them out. Until then. Goodraise 17:56, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Goodraise. I just wanted to ask you to reconsider your opposition to the functional hatnote. I picked you because your wording is so similar to how I think of the situation. Wikipedia doesn't need to get mixed up in censorship. Our readers should, in every browser, have the ability to view without images-- every browser has that.

I feel like pointing this out to our users, that their own browser can do this job for them, is the ideal solution. Once upon a time, my ideal solution was exactly the same as yours: Just educate readers about what their browser can do-- no images is a standard option.

Unfortunately, when I initially made that conclusion, I dramatically underestimated the cultural and technical barriers to IT education. Consider that I routinely am unable to help my grandparents understand very simple, user-friendly technology like a GPS or a cell phone. Now remember that my grandparents are unusually intelligent and highly educated-- they spent 12+ years of life in full time study, they learned to read as small children, they had every advantage, but they still could never figure out how to turn off images in their webbrowser. That's just the truth-- I know of no way to teach them how to do something that complicated.

Now, consider the population that is reading Wikipedia. They may not be fluent in English. They may not be highly literate. They may not be technically literate. Walking them through every possible language/browser combination with instructions on turning off images is very very difficult. I couldn't write a good walkthrough in English, how could I write one in Farsi?

The simple truth is that while telling users to turn off images using their browser is the IDEAL solution, philosophically speaking-- it doesn't work. We do not successfully communicate the instructions to our readers-- it's just a little too much.

It doesn't need to be this difficult though. Instead of making users click on talk, then on a subpage, then on instructions, then on their browser options-- we just need to have one simple box that toggles images.

I'm promise, I'm not trying to harass ya :). It's just your reasoning is right on. This should be handled in browser.

Two lines of javascript could end the whole "controversial images" debate. And with an in-page image toggle, NOTCENSORED would be even stronger. No valid complaints from readers-- we would seize the moral highground by pointing to the image toggle box any time someone brings up the notion of deletion. It would be a stable solution that educates are readons about how we don't censor, but we don't force images on people either.

Anyway, that's my pitch.  :) Either way, thank you for participating in the RFC. :) --HectorMoffet (talk) 06:09, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm warming up to the idea somewhat, but I could only support such a hatnote if it were placed on each and every article, not just this one. And even then, I'm not sure I would. I'll have to give it some thought. Goodraise 06:31, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Goodraise. You have shown yourself to be a skilled image reviewer, and with that in mind I have a request for you. At Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of reptiles of Michigan/archive1, a supporter asked for an image review, and nobody has undertaken one yet. Would you please consider doing the honors? The list is otherwise ready for promotion, and I don't want to leave it at FLC for much longer if possible. Giants2008 (Talk) 20:10, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I have looked into it. Found one possible problem. Commented there. Goodraise 23:05, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of that. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:48, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Always glad to help. Goodraise 21:53, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 00:42, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for updating the assessment on List of Highschool of the Dead characters. I'm adding a Reception section, and hopefully can find some sources for Creation and Conception. AngusWOOF (talk) 21:51, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I didn't realize nobody was taking care of requests for reassessment anymore. I'll try to be more active there again in the future. Goodraise 00:42, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I dug out some references for the creation/conception section. There isn't much from the creator himself but the series director had some interesting quotes about fanservice, and the reviewers had some worthy observations in the adaptations. AngusWOOF (talk) 19:23, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, could you review that part of the article again? I threw in whatever information I could find for Conception, and I think I have enough for the Reception section now. AngusWOOF (talk) 05:36, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Done. Goodraise 06:22, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Note: Original title of this thread was "Bravo". Goodraise 21:48, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I assume you're going to be sourcing, translating, adding real-world context and useful content to all these pointless articles yourself? Quite a brave project to take on yourself, good luck with that. Or you could accept that they existed for nearly 2 years without any noticeable improvement to suggest they warranted an article, and that in the following year nobody objected to their removal--Jac16888 ^Talk 18:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I accept your premises, but not your conclusion. Now, if you're done with your sarcastic venting in my direction, I'll be on my way, but if you happen to be in the mood to resume our discussion from back then, I'd be happy to participate. Goodraise 21:48, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I tried to use the Sublist feature on List of JoJo's Bizarre Adventure volumes, but this did not end up working as planned and the chapter lists were never hidden in the substituted page (I've commented out the substitutions). It seems to be working fine on List of One Piece manga volumes, but I can't figure out why it's not working on the subpages here. Could you take a look seeing as you've worked on the template so much?—Ryulong (琉竜) 19:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Always happy to help! Use |SublistOf=List of JoJo's Bizarre Adventure volumes. Template documentation updated. Goodraise 03:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

That was it?—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:18, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that was it. What did you expect? Goodraise 04:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Goodraise, Thanks so much for coming over to

You're welcome! However, I don't really have anything more to say about the matter. If you want to know something about lists, I'm your man, but that kind of article is out of my comfort zone. Have you asked for input from a relevant WikiProject? Wikipedia:WikiProject Business perhaps? Goodraise 01:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I have nominated

I'll try to make the time. Goodraise 18:11, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

(Because I know you'll improve it! Thanks.) The Rambling Man (talk) 18:36, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I tried, but apparently it's been closed now. Let me know if and when it's re-nominated, hopefully I'll have more spare time and energy then. In the meantime, you may want to enlist the help of a copyeditor.

WP:GOCE is usually a good place to look. Goodraise 04:11, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:55, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:16, 5 July 2016 (UTC)