User talk:Ryulong/Archive 54

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Sorry to bother you my friend, but can you tell me why you did that? I think we should mention that in the article TheTrueGamerX (talk) 12:40, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Because you unnecessarily changed the section which was only about the soundtrack to include a manga which is not relevant to this particular article.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 17:58, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Unnecessarily!! Well, I just expanded the section. Also, that manga is completely based on the game, unlike

Pokémon Special which have an independent story, so I thought we should mention it there. Anyway, do whatever you want, I won't stop you. TheTrueGamerX (talk

) 05:19, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

You added it to the fucking soundtrack section.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:23, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay, okay.... I just wanted to put music, manga and a lot of things that related to Pokémon Black and White under one section, nothing more. So let's stop here. TheTrueGamerX (talk) 05:38, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

There's a whole

manga

page where your info belongs, anyway.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:41, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello Ryulong, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of

I think he should be moved to the main page because he is a common feature because of his numerous incarnations. But I can wait until near the series finale and have got more info on his new incarnation. While I can accept the former, the latter is a different story but I'll wait until another "non Televi-kun" news entry on Buredoun's Matrintis look comes in to confirm it.72.184.129.252 (talk) 22:10, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Just leave him in separate sections on the villain pages rather than making some ungodly section on the main page which is not about the characters. And leave him as "Buredoran".—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:17, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Please explain why the consensus on the talk page was over-ruled without discussion? According to the style guides, e.g.

Foreign characters that resemble apostrophes...are represented by their correct Unicode characters.

Do you have any source more reliable than the ones used that forces this to be approximated by an apostrophe? Why is this single exception made to the guidelines? W Nowicki (talk) 18:07, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

But does

'Iolani Palace than it is at ʻIolani Palace

, and just parse it as "ʻIolani Palace".—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Not true at all. I have used Internet Explorer for years and never had a problem. There were claims many years ago that some ancient versions with various font packages not installed might have had issues, but each time I ask for specifics it seems lost in history. Which exact version are you using, and exactly what is your effect? Certainly scholarly sources in the recent past will use proper typography. You would never get an article published in any history journal (let alone encyclopedia) using an apostrophe with the reasoning that some old browser might not display it. If you want to avoid diacritics then just omit it instead of mis-writing it.

The other argument that keeps coming out is that Wikipedia does allow place names in European languages with diacritics. See Champs-Élysées for example. Hawaiian-language titles should get the same treatment as the languages spoken by white people.

You are free to express your opinion about what is "better" but a major article move should be discussed first and consensus reached before violating guidelines. W Nowicki (talk) 20:50, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

The Okina is not the same as an acute or grave accent mark or diacritics. And the article was at

Hawaiʻi

or anything else.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:54, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Please elaborate. I am not a linguist but have been doing quite a few Hawaiian articles. The Okina is essentially written as a diacritic, in that it always goes before a vowel, but if anything is much more important that European accent marks since it serves as a consonant and can have major meaning implications. The only other way it is different I can think of is that the language is spoken by people with dark skin. That does not seem like a very good reason to outlaw them.

The word ʻIolani is not an English name. It is a Hawaiian language word, and that language does not use apostrophes. Dropping diacritics does not translate to English, just as "Champs-Élysées" is not "Champs-Elysees" translated into English. As I stated above, proper typoography is most common in encyclopedic quality modern sources. If you move to just

Iolani Palace that would be an improvement in my opinion as I also stated. But that is not a reason to mis-spell as an apostrophe. Note that several article titles do in fact include diacritcs, such as Kalākaua David Kawānanakoa, Kameʻeiamoku

etc for example. Searching is a red herring since the redirects have taken care of that for years.

Which sources are you using to back up your assertions? W Nowicki (talk) 01:19, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

It is better not to use the okina in the title of a page. That is all I am saying. The okina (ʻ), a separate letter in the Hawaiian language which cannot be easily parsed when typing, is not the same as an acute accent over the E as found in the name "Champs-Élysées". Using a character which can be approximated by the standard QWERTY keyboard is better than using a character which cannot be viewed on older browsers. In addition, it is the way that is the best for formatting the name in English, anyway. At the English Wikipedia, we do not use characters in article titles that cannot be accessed by means of a standard keyboard.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:22, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Your last statement especially is not true at all. I gave examples of several articles that have similar characters. Even better is ʻIolani Barracks which is the same word (building on the palace grounds) and does not use an apostrophe. Others are ʻŌʻū, Kaʻaʻawa, Hawaii, plus of course the others in other languages. There is no rule that only allows their use on articles about white people, since that would clearly not be fair. As I keep saying, the searching has worked for years by using a redirect. Is there a paricular search issue that has broken recently?

Anyway, it seems we disagree, so time to ask more opinions on how to resolve the dispute. W Nowicki (talk) 18:48, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Just move it back already. I stopped caring.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

If plot summary is the only thing that can be written about a subject, than it's not notable. The article should include real-world impact in some form. Sales data for example. If the article can't be about anything else, you're indirectly asking somebody to

I've cut out all of the unnecessary plot summary. Also, these are DVDs packaged with an issue of a magazine on a yearly basis. It's not going to have sales data. These subjects are notable, and I have plans to deal with the page without you superfluously sending it to AFD. Regardless, I cut out all of the unnecessary plot summary. So bugger off.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:52, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Plot summary is not bad. Just that an article needs to have other info. not just sales data, maybe reasons people like a particular work. Something that shows

WP:CIVIL. NotARealWord (talk

) 14:24, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Some things are notable, but don't have any of the shit you're talking about due to the nature of the subject matter.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:07, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Can something be notable if little information exists? Is there any fiction media that is notable desptie having never gotten reviews or opinion polls? Seriously is there? NotARealWord (talk) 10:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure that various episodes of various television shows or some particular novels of a long series might not be reviewed, but are still worthy of note.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 17:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Why did you revert my edit to Super Sentai? Blaedvanderwoodsen (talk) 05:04, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

What you added was trivia. We don't need to mention every single anime that references Super Sentai.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:20, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Is the whole section not trivia? Blaedvanderwoodsen (talk) 05:38, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Let's put it this way: the five random episodes in Sailor Moon that reference Super Sentai are nothing like entire shows (Sun Red) or recurring characters (Ginyu Force, Axem Rangers) like the other mentions.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough then. Blaedvanderwoodsen (talk) 23:28, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey Ryu, I know that I did a minor mistake and I apologize for that but can you at least appreciate a little instead of constantly taunting? I'm not a native English speaker and neither a Japanese one but I'm trying my level best to provide accurate and confirmed information. So, try to show at least a bit soft behavior towards the users *no offense*, thank you. ♫♪Adyniz♪♫ 03:23, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

You're right. I should not have been so harsh over the wo/o thing. I'm sorry.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:37, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem, just wanted to spit out what I was thinking. Thanks for understanding *cheers* :) ♫♪Adyniz♪♫ 06:11, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

While you're here, maybe you could fix what CHAK 001 attempted?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:13, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'll give it a try. ♫♪Adyniz♪♫ 09:06, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I will accept your word on that :-) I put it there only because it was on Sentai, apparently in reference to Super Sentai, but did not belong in that article either. Grant | Talk 06:03, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Even that was added wrong :P—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:44, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I've seen you around the tokusatsu wikiproject, so i thought you are skilled in the tokusatsu topic. I was wondering if you could help me on the

I don't really know a lot about Android Kikaider and Kikaider 01.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:55, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Very well, do you know any realiable sources that might point m to the right direction then? I'm new to the tokusatsu articles.

talk

) 18:53, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm still not pleased with your explanation on how 1st ƒ is better than 1stƒ. You keep quoting "Accessibility", but does it really hinder anyone's ability to understand if there's no space? People aren't going to look at the old version and think "Well I thought it said first, but there's an F there! Dur, what does that mean? One stf?" And then by magically putting a space before it, it somehow becomes more readable. My reasoning behind not having a space is that it saves room in the table. Adding the space is just extraeneous and takes up more room, especially on TAR3 when Dennis & Andrew got 10th. I'm obviously not the only one. I see people reverting the symbol back quite often. So maybe if you provide a solid reason for why you're doing this, then we'll all stop messing with the pages. Thank you for your time 174.1.48.24 (talk) 11:12, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Putting a space makes it easier to read. Width of the columns is not an issue. Making it easy for people to read is what is important.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:01, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

How exactly does adding a space make it easier to read? 174.1.48.24 (talk) 22:12, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

It identifies that the F is a unique item to the ordinal number.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:13, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello Ryulong. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Richard Poage, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, Athletes who have competed for the USA internationally usually survive AFD and shouldn't go via A7. May I also point out that tagging an article A7 in its moment of creation is possibly overhasty, and not informing a newbie that you have tagged their article for deletion is rather bitey. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 14:59, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Oi. It's a promotional article of a random athlete who has not done anything.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:04, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

help TARA 4 is protected until to 12 december 2010 and TAR 17 is protected until to 22 december 2010.

The user id 76.172.125.186 is flamming or spamming because record results and vandal. Akuindo (talk) 01:20, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay. I will look for help.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:13, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Thks Akuindo (talk) 02:27, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Is it one of the policy of Wikipedia to remove the bolded punctuation? It allows readers to know the actual title of the song, as the "written by" is together with the song name. Or should the "written" by be remove? -- Frontier95 (talk) 12:38, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I have just read the Wikipedia:JS policy, is that wat it meant to be? Just wanted to ask, are you one of the admin. -- Frontier95 (talk) 12:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

It is just not necessary to bold those items.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:38, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Ever since you were involved in the preliminary discussion on Non-Roman characters in article titles, there has been a separate proposal regarding the usage of Non-Roman characters in re-directs and DABs, and you may be interested in joining the

Also, please do not freak over the results table. I double checked everything and all of the info is correct. It's pretty weird how two legs had double eliminations and two teams actually came back, but that's how it happened, believe me. This is looking to be a real "fun" project. 174.1.48.24 (talk) 09:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Whatever you can do to fix it, do so.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 09:19, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, i'm doing the first half results for Leg 11 of TAR 8, but i have question, the midpoint results are the time they got to the stadium or the airplane tickets they got?, also i did TAR 10 results Gonzalochileno (talk) 20:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Whenever they get to the point where they're told to keep racing should be the midpoint results.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:35, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I say use the airplane tickets, because that's the point where the Quebec Part ended and the Ontario Part started. (That would be Bransens, Linzes, Weavers if I'm not mistaken) 174.1.48.24 (talk) 02:40, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello there. Regarding this edit. I was puzzled by both your lack of edit summary and your decision to remove the content. What exactly does nn mean? The edit clearly wasn't vandalism so a whole scale Twinkle revert was not in order. I placed the {{

P.S. You don't seem to have made any comments on the artilce's talk page nor the contributor's talk page. Both would have been a good idea given that you reverted a seemingly

P.P.S. Now I see: you nominated the editor's article for

God, why does it matter?

WP:MADEUP

stuff shouldn't be kept in the mainspace.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:30, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

It matters a lot. Policy is policy. Someome going around deleting content without leaving proper edit summaries is exactly {{uw-delete1}}. You still haven't explained what nn means. I've tagged the article for speedy deletion anyway. I don't know if I can do that while a AfD is underway, but we'll soon find out. — Fly by Night (talk) 00:34, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Getting rid of shit content is better than following strict guidelines.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:43, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Ha ha ha... Well said! — Fly by Night (talk) 00:45, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I had this idea a while ago, but people completely ignored it, so I want your thoughts. It involves legs with an unused Yield or U-Turn. Currently they're displayed like this 5<>. However, I think they'd look better like this <5>. 174.1.48.24 (talk) 02:43, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Go for it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:48, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

In another thought, why are the U-Turn symbols << and >> anyway? We could use the actual U-shaped Subset and Superset symbols for the Double U-Turn in TAR17 and use U and ∩ for the Double U-Turn.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:50, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Noooo, I came up with those symbols! I was so proud of them.

Haha, just kidding. I came up with them because they were similar to the > of the Yield and because the U-Turn is an "Evolution" of the Yield, I figured they should have very similar symbols. I don't think we should use U and ∩ because one of the main points of the existing symbols is that one points away from the team using it while the other points at the team it's being used on. 174.1.48.24 (talk) 02:58, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

It's a U-Turn, so why don't we use U-shaped symbols anyway? :P There's got to be another one for the 2nd U-Turn, anyway.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:23, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I think it looks great with the >><< for one and the "sideways U's" for the Double U-Turn because (1) they both point and (2) they look drastically different from each other. It satisfies all the things we want to accomplish with the symbols. 174.1.48.24 (talk) 03:43, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

But perhaps the set symbols should be the primary U-Turn symbol and the <<>> being secondary.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:52, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm...both options have pros and cons. I think we need more input for this one. Question: If you DID switch them, would you also switch the colors? Would the sideways U's turn Brown while the >><< turn cyan? 174.1.48.24 (talk) 04:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Could just make them yellow (gold) because you won't find a U-Turn and a Yield in the same race. Keep the second U-Turn brown, or just make them the same color (gold/yellow) seeing as the different symbols are enough to tell them apart.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Lots of the foreign editions have both a Yield and U-Turn. 174.1.48.24 (talk) 07:40, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, if they're in the same season, different colors definitely have to be used. But if the things aren't featured in the same season, use one color for both items.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:49, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Which is exactly why I think everything looks great the way it is (Although maybe we should color the "sideways U's" Brown) 174.1.48.24 (talk)

P.S., the TAR11 results table is screwed up. I'd fix it myself, but I'm afraid I'll break it more :P

Fixed it. Anyway, sideways Us are better for the U-turn. I am really tired of people changing them at TAR17.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:16, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

(Looks at the edit history of TAR17) Yeesh...some people don't get the message. But this is exactly the problem. People are so dedicated to >> and << that they're afraid of anything else, like the Sideways U's. This is why I'm thinking that the >><< should stay because if you change them all to U's, you're going to have to undo a lot of edits...174.1.48.24 (talk) 08:28, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

But we'd just point to the consensus developed and then they'd be blocked for edit warring against consensus. The <<>> aren't the best.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:30, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't want to seem stubborn, but I really think we need more parties to discuss this one. Just to be sure there's no conflict. 174.1.48.24 (talk) 08:34, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Started a thread.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:45, 30 November 2010 (UTC)