User talk:Nifboy - Knowledge

3908:. This project is probably different than other assessment drives you have worked on, it involves more assessment of lower ranked articles, it has input and staff from the foundation, and specific goals to improve and measure content of public policy articles. It also involves collaboration from some university classes, we are using an experimental assessment rubric, and most articles will be assessed by multiple reviewers to get a range of scores for each article. I have learned a lot from many of the assessors comments (you left really detailed notes, thanks!) and am really excited about the insight from this group of Wikipedians. I hope you are finding some benefits to involvement in this project. 1) your assessments are part of research that is attempting to increase credibility of Knowledge in academic circles, 2) there is a great group of assessors involved in 4283:

would like to recruit some more Wikipedian assessors, and I was hoping you could help with that. I think community members would be more likely to participate if they are recruited by Wikipedians like yourself who have a good reputation. The strategy that worked last semester was to leave an individual message on the talk pages of non-adversarial Wikipedians. I looked for people by contributions to public policy related articles and those active on the 1.0 Editorial Team. I usually mentioned in the message what specifically about their work history made me think they would be a good assessment team participant. This is super time consuming to contact like 50 people, but only doing a few is not so bad. Also, I am looking for feedback about assessing with PPI, so please check out the discussion on the

436:. I want to propose a new Webcomic Standard to end all this fighting and deletionist activity. As WCs are often difficult to verify, I've reduced somewhat the importance of verification. If the info comes from a webcomic site (even those hosted by free companies) that has been along long enough (six months), and can be verified by viewing the site, then that should qualify. If it comes from a forum, it must contain at least 20 posts from users other than the author. That's all for verification! -- 1789: 1713: 3407: 3077: 3930:

the assessment talk page. Next week, I should have some preliminary results to share with you, I will also post the second assessment request very soon. The discussion on the talk page is very exciting, and I hope if you are interested, you will provide input on the Article Feedback Tool which is being piloted on articles in WP:USPP. Please let me know if there is anything I and the project team can do to make working on this project a more positive experience. Thanks again,

4668: 1634: 5475: 5374: 5142: 2892: 4888: 2376: 2063: 5293: 1171:

whether I should back off and see if someone transwikis it all. My line of thinking was "well it's just getting more creep in the form of little sentences which are pure game guide, nobody seems too bothered about transferring it or making the article good". Is that bad faith on my part? I'd really appreciate some advice if you've got the time, rather than blindly flailing about with the article and getting reverted back to nada. Thanks.

649:

to editors in what exactly is expected for this criterion. The CITE page isn't the easiest chunk of information to digest. The most important outcome is that the facts of an article can be easily verified, and if there is a simple task list for people, my hope is that these things can be taken care of quickly, so that reviewers can spend more time checking the quality of articles rather than having to get the boilerplate correct. Cheers

5074: 5011: 4948: 4582: 4519: 4783: 4443: 3477: 1850: 5438: 3654: 3147: 3121: 47:). Because there are so many links and pages about homestar runner there, I've been trying to figure out exactly what the relevant things to put on Knowledge are. It's tough because Knowledge won't allow advertising for non-wikimedia partners, so a lot of fans will notice how much could be put into the articles. Maybe you have an opinion to contribute to the 638:

whether good articles should be specifying the references format more specifically. As it is specified at the minute external references would be acceptable. They do allow a reader to perform independent fact checking even if the format is not perfect. The GA criteria should spell out clearly what is acceptable and what is not. Cheers

3970:. The results of that experiment will compare your idea of article quality to the ranking from the Article Feedback Tool and your input will help improve that tool. I hope you enjoy being a part of this research, I am pretty excited about the results so far, and am looking forward to continuing to work with you on assessment. 4731: 4193:

how successful the project is, not just at improving the quality of public policy articles, but at incorporating Knowledge as a teaching tool and recruiting and retaining college students as editors. We still need you in 2011, but it will mostly be assessments of student articles. Currently, there is

4014:

Hello. You are receiving this message as you previously posted in the ongoing RfC on whether Featured List Criteria section 3b should be modified or eliminated. Based on feedback and commentary received during the section-by-section analysis of the current criteria, I have proposed a new version of

2332:

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work.

648:

I take your point, and agree with yourself and the editor who removed the 2 articles before I added the References sections. I've actually put the template {{unreferenced}} into pages before rather than nominate them. My overall point though is that I think we could be a bit more explicit and helpful

570:

Just a note about the webcomic I added to the list before your edit - I was just on my way writing an article about it, maybe I should have done that first before adding it to the list. Still, it's good to know that someone is looking out for the page, editing it mere seconds after I uploaded it (no,

5404:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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

4262:

needs assessments, so please do a couple if you can; articles toward the bottom have only 1 or none assessments. I know some of the material is pretty dry, but this assessment is the most important one for the fall semester and this assessment will be the primary method of showing article quality to

4246:

First, thanks NifBoy, I am in awe of the work the assessment team did for this project. The results from the quantitative metric assessments were amazing, really. Check out what your work shows about Knowledge article quality - I think it’s exciting, but you’ve probably figured out by now that I’m a

4192:

Thanks Nifboy, for all your work assessing articles with WP:USPP over the past few months. I will have some results to report to the assessment team in January. The next semester should be pretty exciting there are over 25 university classes signed up with the project. Your input is helping to gauge

2567:

Hey there. :) I don't know if it would be too much trouble to go back and check, but I have added several articles for games debuting throughout 1980s over the past couple of months. If you're going for being a completist, in all likelihood I may have put some things up that you have reviews for. :)

901:

I'm going to probably split off the character information to List of Chrono Cross characters, since 90% of those links lead to that page anyhow. Anyway, just in case you haven't seen the CT peer review section lately, what would you assess Chrono Trigger as in its current state? I'm thinking the rom

637:

I wasn't saying no references at all should be ok, I was referring to the fact that many articles have inline external links which are actually acceptable according to the link you gave me. Since there is no standard for references and footnotes even in FA land my question was designed to figure out

5192:

The interview consists of some 15 questions that you can answer however you like and which you can tinker with up until the newsletter is published. Our hope is to have a small number of interviewees cued up for upcoming Featured Editor columns so your interview would most likely appear in a future

4395:

The Public Policy Initiative is super exciting this term. The topics are really interesting this term and the student's are producing some really good quality content. Recent numbers indicate that our project is actually contributing a significant amount of content to Knowledge. There is a group of

3929:

To give you an update on assessment, about half of the assessments are complete for the first part of this first assessment. I had some trouble finding public policy experts to join us in assessing, but finally managed to recruit a group last week, hopefully some of them will join the discussion on

1124:

to the list of featured article candidates. Overall the candidature is going well with many of the objections now sorted out. The final concrete objection is with the article's prose. I have been the main contributor to the article and have been looking at it for the previous 9 - 10 months. My eyes

574:

You seem to be supporting the medium here on wikipedia, which I think is really important - I'm new here but I hope to do something similar with other "elements of popular culture" that people seem to avoid mentioning because of their supposed lack of artistic merit... I just edited the video games

335:

You were a little brutal with the archiving. In particular, you took out several people's opinions on syndication. If you'll look over last time I did it, I provided some summarised blurbs on what had gone before. If you don't feel like doing this (because it's a pain in the arse, I know) let me

5189:

WP:VG's Newsletter department is looking for editors to interview for our Featured Editor column, and your name has come up in discussions during previous quarters as a likely candidate. From your edit history it is apparent that you are not currently as active an editor as you once were, and it's

1767:

For commenting on World War II Online, I didn't even see the search capability at the Playnet forums. I did several searches but did not find the specific links. I couldn't see any posts that were older than 2006 (or 2005 when I checked the Archive). I'm still skeptical but at least I have another

1170:

Hi Nifboy, I stumbled onto this article last night and began doing a little editting (I'm a noob contributor), and I've noticed you put up the wikify/edit box on the article. I'm at a loss as to whether it's acceptable for me to try and rewrite this article and cut through the game guide guff, or

196:

Ah, I see. The info on IGN confirms this. The Intelligent Systems article needs to be corrected, then, because it states that IS is simply a different name for R&D1. I'll try to fix it and expand the IS article a bit. I'll look for any other Nintendo games that are misattributed to Intelligent

16:

I don't have a preference to where I reply: If I think a reply would be better understood in context, I'll reply here. Responses to more general questions will probably take place either on your talk page or the talk page I'm pointed to. If I see you have a preference on your talk page I'll follow

4815:

from Knowledge. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about it

4282:

Hi Nifboy, Your work assessing article quality is really valuable and generated some excellent results from fall semester. The assessment process has been streamlined and dates are clearly posted for the upcoming assessment rounds. The Initiative has a lot more classes signed up for spring, so I

4152: 369:

Yeah, I had no idea, either. I kept following lists and categories and they just poured out of the woodwork. A lot of them were marginal, sure, but there were several significant comics as well. I think we've got most of them, now, but who knows how many are out there that have no cats, aren't

75:

Hi, Can you give a valid reason why you and your friends from Comixpedia continue to edit out an example of a 3d webcomic? That comic happens to be a 3d comic and I noticed there were no examples in the article. I added it as an example of a 3d webcomic. I would hate to think you are all claiming

2759:

It's not a matter of weather or not the content text looks strange or not. It's a matter of not having enough space in the column because it does not have enough space in the column. Some browsers (or monitors) have enough room to display. Maybe yours does not. If we have a title that was 20

2462:

Any game, move, book having multiple installments and spin-off's has a series article since Vector Man has a sequel and will eventually have more installments, it is best to have a series article for it. I did redirect the route so if any one was searching for VectorMan1 they would automatically

3954:

Thanks for contributing to WP:USPP, your assessments are a part of a deeper look at assessing article quality in Knowledge. The quality and rationality behind the assessment scores by the Wikpedians on this project is really impressive, it is an insightful and knowledgeable group. There is some

59:

I don't think it counts as advertizing if the site is a valuable and relatively reliable source of information. I mean, National Geographic isn't a Wikimedia partner, but nobody would quibble over whether or not that would be a good link to include (if there were one from National Geographic, I

4079:

This round measures the baseline quality of articles before our students started working on them. Many of these articles have undergone drastic revision already, so it may not be useful to leave comments about them on the talk pages. We'll be asking you to review the same set of articles once

3916:, so if interested, those involved in assessment on the project will be asked to help improve and rate this tool as well, and 4) subject matter experts are assessing articles alongside Wikipedians and comparisons of results will provide some insight as to the rigor of Knowledge quality rating. 1060:, albeit as "Start". I now know that I need to do some serious work on the article, and I thank you for alerting me to that. I noticed in your edit summary you said, "a bit too editorial". Could you possibly elaborate and provide a few examples (just so I get the general idea)? Thanks! 2816:

No, I disagree with you. I've read the page, like I said, and it still does not apply to Touhou. If you look at the page history, at least one other editor agrees with the table. If you have concerns with the wp:table, then discuss on the talk page. Like I said, I did not write it to

401:

lost articles (and probably writers), right there! If Knowledge were a company, that would equal 400 (now 401) lost customers. Seeing as there are only about six thousand webcomics out there, that's about a 7% loss. Take away the less active comics out of that 6,000, and it's more like a

708:

article, which I would like to do an improvement drive for this weekend. I'll personally be editing it heavily to try to bring it up to the status of good article, but I'll need the help of good editors who know a lot about the phenomenon. It would be great if you could help out! The

3987:

This message is just to tell your assessments are awesome and thanks, Nifboy. Your contributions are very appreciated. (Your comments on the Public Citizen article cracked me up - that was great, very succinct.) There will be weekly updates about the research for this project posted

1013:

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. –

4038:

Hi Nifboy! Since Amy Roth's out on maternity leave, I'm pushing out the next round of assessments she needs. This time, we're comparing your assessment to readers' assessments. And instead of us assigning you articles, we're letting you pick! The full list of topics is on

590:

Just an FYI: Illiad does, with rare and obvious exceptions, draw each and every strip. Since I know him personally, I know that he's an honourable guy and doesn't pull the crap that you inaccurately accuse him of. In fact, I've heard him deride other artists who do this.

2568:(See the first thread on the WP:VG talk page if you want to see my progress report.) If you're not worried about that, then you may catch some of the ones I added as you make your way through 1989 and on, and I have a bit of a head start on you at the moment anyway. ;) 555:

Hey, just wanted to know your opinion on my last page I submitted on the Sega Exodus...whether you felt it was okay, or needed imporvement, or whatever. PS - Do you think it would be okay to add in links to ROM images to certain games for Sega, etc.? Is it allowed? —

728:

Sorry, I didn't re-read the Good Article page recently. I've been waiting for someone to make a references page before I relisted the page as a good article, but completely forgot that the pictures need references, too. Got a little ahead of myself, my apoligies.

3799:

Ah, I never knew there was an AFC project, and I can see why AFC would specifically want a redirect-class, in contrast to other projects for which every article with a redirect would have those redirects be "within scope" and thus impossible to make any sense of.

1684:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on 526:

Hi there! As one of those work works on deadend pages and knows about computer/video games I wonder if you could look at these two articles? The first is currently a deadend on PROD and second is a proposed Merge. Some expert cleanup would be appreciated! Thanks

5105:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on 5042:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on 4979:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on 4613:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on 4550:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on 5499:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

4498:

Had you noticed this has reopened? I only did today. I stopped looking in after discussion faded away. Now I've put it on my watchlist. I've just checked and find the preceding one was opened just over two years ago and has still not been closed and archived.

2527:

Sorry, I am newbie at Knowledge, and I am not really sure how things work here. In the Dungeon Keeper 1/2 section I saw other old fansites listed under the External links tab, so I tought I can add my own there, as it has useful articles and rare downloads.

3358: 2836:

I want to let you know it is rude to call people IPs. In the case we are both in, we are both editors. Do not call me an IP because it seems like you are trying to defame me. I want this to be a warning: if this comes up again, I will seek resolution

4847:

deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Knowledge guidelines.

353:

My experience has been that we say a lot of the same things over again anyway. Although I do confess the archiving wasn't "brutal" so much as it was "lazy trimming," i.e. simply cutting out all but the most recent discussions. I'll see what I can do.

3252:

already have character lists that are more complete than the ones on the list, which is why I didn't copy anything to those pages. Unless you want me to copy the kanji (which I don't feel is at all necessary) there's nothing to add to those pages.

5503:

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 until the discussion has finished.

4284: 1183:

Thankyou for such a quick response. Since I'm not bang out of line doing so, I'm going to start recycling the guide material into something which is hopefully not as bad, allowing more capable editors to do something with the results. Cheers.

4257:

I see you are not as active as you used to be, if you get inspired I hope you will check out what's happening on WP:USPP there's lots of exciting stuff, and we still need assessors if you're at all interested. Especially if you get a chance the

5168:

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.

4423:

The assessors are doing a really amazing job, in fact, here at WMF, we are using your ratings as the “gold standard” to test the Article Feedback Tool and see how well it works. I will be presenting lots of research in the coming months. Best,

186:

No, they are not the same thing, and have not been the same thing for two decades. Intelligent Systems was a team that split off from R&D1 in 1986. R&D1 was still a dev team for Nintendo up until this year, when it was merged with EAD.

3451:

Thank you for patiently allowing us (those of us in favor of a WP:Research like thing) to pick apart your criticisms. I'm confident that through coming to an understanding, we can make whatever comes of WP:Research much better for Knowledge.

109:

Hi, thanks for helping revert it. I am still new to Wiki and I did not expect to start off an edit war. I hope you realize that I do not mean any offense with any edits although sometimes people taking edits or changes personally can occur...

84:

Because it reads like an advertisement (or vanity), the comic in question has no article, just a link directly to the comic, and the webcomic article doesn't have examples of clip art, pixel art, or photographed webcomics, despite there being

4080:

students have finished them too, so please be sure you're using the links provided so you're getting the versions immediately prior to when the students made their first edits. Ideally, these assessments should be completed by December 1.

4420:

There is a group of about 25 subject matter experts who are assessing, and last week I sent them a tutorial video on how to leave comments on talk pages. So if you see any newcomers on the discussion pages, please help me welcome them.

4084: 4040: 886:

I noticed you moved some stuff to a gaming wiki. There is a lot more blitzball content at Wikibooks, which will be deleted soon. We have been moving it to FF Wiki but you are more than welcome to get it fo the gaming wiki you mentioned

4197:

to look at the improvements students made to their articles. If possible please assess by 5 January 2011; these results will be presented at an international conference later in January! Have a wonderful holiday season, all the best,

4087:

and do a few more assessments -- especially on any articles that have only one or two assessments completed. I need a minimum of three assessments for each article, and some of the articles farther down the list still need attention.

769:

Hey, if you don't mind, could you give the page another look? I've taken all your suggestions into account (except for dropping the gameplay sub-headers, though I might still do that or something similar). Thanks for the suggestions.

2905:

prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the

3956: 3745:

as the basis for my sweeps, so the collateral damage should be reduced to mixed-scope redirects that haven't been changed from Stub-Class or whatever other class the article was. Of the pages I removed banners from today, only

3335: 2583:

Whew - I've only got 8 issues from 1993 left to go! I've been motoring. Granted, I've got the entirety of the "Eye of the Monitor" column to do, but I think I will take some time off after finishing "The Role of Computers". :)

840:? Well, I've made some tweaks to the organizational structure (though not much to the writing itself, though somebody else may have in the interim). What do you think? Improved a bit, at least as far as organization goes? 4259: 4194: 3960: 578:

Still, it's great to see that there's others here that do the same. That's the point of wikis after all, they're beyond "cultural snobbery" and reflect the views of the actual users who care enough about the articles.

3553:

I think this idea is very good. If this is the idea you had when suggesting the trial run, I apologize for my thick skull. Thanks for sticking around. Your patience with us research folk continues to be invaluable.

4073: 2673:

I'd gotten so worked up with Jinnai that I'd forgotten why I'd really wanted to use the infobox there in the first place. If I had I probably spelled that out better in the edit summary this might've worked out a lot

5172:

4415: 3824:

Hi Nifboy, I got your name from the Editorial Team participant list, and I think you had expressed some previous interest in the project. I wanted to tell you that we will be testing out assessment metrics in the

4833: 4391: 4106:

Hi Nifboy, just wanted to ping you on this again -- there are only a few left to assess, so I don't even need you to do 10, even 2-3 would be awesome. Any chance you can get to the assessments this week? Thanks!

5232:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose 985: 431:

Edit: It has come to my attention that close to 500 articles at Comixpedia are marked, and not all of the comics listed there were deleted from here. But I'm still sure a lot of them are. Enough to still be a

5428: 4460:

and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cake, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

4362: 4354: 4346: 4340: 4313: 4302: 455:

Back in my box now. Eventually, at some far distant point in the future when robots rule the earth people realise that David Letterman isn't funny anymore, I'll have fully gotten my temper in check. Thank

4248: 1658:, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found 5496: 2774:

If it looks like a sheer wall of text, then I think your looking at the page for the sake of looking at the page. When we write articles, we write articles that say something, not because it looks nice.

916:

I don't understand your adding of "mid-importance" to The Sims. Critics consider it a revolutionary game, and its either the top or within the top selling PC games of all time. What are you basing that

4072:

Hi Nifboy! Thanks so much for your help on the Public Policy Initiative assessments. I really appreciate all your help -- we'll be in great shape when Amy gets back, thanks to all of your efforts! The

3577: 1680:

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "

5101:

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "

5038:

4975:

4609:

4546:

2732:

Hi Nifboy. I wasn't sure by the end if you supported keeping a guideline to include reviews in EL, or if you are quite happy to have them treated the same as other sources. If you could pop over to:

3992:, look for the first one tomorrow. The next assessment request will come in early November. There is a lot of expertise and discussion about article quality happening in the project, so stay tuned. 5197:

to get a sense of the kinds of questions you would be asked. If you see this note, please let me know at my talk page if you would be willing to answer some questions for the Newsletter. Thanks! -

3353: 3963:

for you. This assessment set will wrap up the first experiment which analyzes the consistency of the quantitative metric and compares subject matter expert assessment to Wikipedian assessment.

4834: 4338: 4076:

is ready for you to review. Like the previous round, please pick 10 of the articles to review from the list, and it's especially critical that you use the version I've linked to for these.

3838: 2466:

I did post my idea in the talk page and I think it is best that all series should have a series article, that is what I plan on doing for alot of franchises that still lack a main article.--

2502:

Nice Work on the HeadHunter merging, I'll do the Vectorman. I really appreciate you taking the time to give me all the pointers, by the way my name is Bilal, I am a Knowledge from Pakistan.

1677:

is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Knowledge policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

954:

article. I'm working with other users to enhance the quality of this article and (hopefully) bring it to FA level: if you have some time to spare, could you please send me (or post on the

3879: 3491:. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Knowledge's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also 3502:

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to

2802:

I read the article you linked, and this case is not the same as that. We have information comparing kanji, english, romanji, and descriptions. Information must be tabulated clearly.

4837:. Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit 3909: 2653: 1608:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any 2408:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 2095:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 1821:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 1745:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 4920:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 4277: 3834: 2950: 2056: 1236:? We'll try to get help with the sports articles, if that's not up your alley. I'm hoping we can tie up the loose ends on that section by Thursday - is that possible? Thanks! 1131:

I would really love to get this article featured as you can probably see from the page's history! I've worked very hard on it and I see this as possibly being the final hurdle.

5446: 5401: 4414:

If you are still active, another assessment round is posted. This round is the follow-up to the previous assessment, so it should reflect some big improvements to the articles.

4287:, and let me know there if you have a chance to recruit some other assessors. I hope you are looking forward to another great semester working on this project. Drop me a line - 3819: 1279: 4019:. I would like your input on ways to improve and refine this proposal, in hopes of reaching consensus to implement this change to the criteria. Thank you for your attention. 4001: 3939: 3891: 3869: 2404:

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 "

2091:

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 "

1817:

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 "

1741:

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 "

1604:

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 "

318:

God, This whole thing has had "INTARWEB DRAMA" pasted all over it since then. I usually keep my snarky comments to myself but I hit post on that one before I could reconsider.

4916:

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "

4893: 4881: 4296: 3850: 1574: 4390:

I hope you are active enough to assess with WP:USPP, because A new assessment round is posted. This round is mostly starts and stubs, so evaluation should be really quick.

4365:

during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.

2733: 3989: 3368: 1893:

this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click

1581: 1338: 2007: 4965: 4956: 4679: 3344: 3337: 5458: 5278: 5091: 5082: 4599: 4590: 4536: 4527: 3573: 3213:

my intention was not to stop the merger, but to infact make certain because the series spans multiple media that the information was not inmpoperly redirected without

3205: 516: 477:

to strike through or remove outright any comments of mine that you think are out of line on the Project page. I suggest this because if you see something and kill it

4083:

I anticipate this taking a lot less time than previous rounds, as many of these articles are quite short. If you have extra time and want to help, please go back to

662:

should be marked as good, given the state of it's citing references? I have a feeling we may need to weed out some of the good articles already in the list... Cheers

76:

ownership over an article in Knowledge which is open to edits and improvements. I might feel the need to consider reporting your over edits as abuse of wikipedia.org

5463: 5442: 4660: 4491: 1782: 1358:

You are horrible! Thanks to you linking to that "N" game on your page, my little bit of remaining productivity has just been reduced to zero. :P *plays some more* --

743:

I noticed that you brought up a discussion on the WikiProject Inheritance Trilogy. I suggest that you join it, I think it would be nice to have more people aboard.

4942: 2117: 2044: 2481:

Makes sense, tell you what i'll minimize the Vectorman 1 & 2 articles with only essential information and then make a series article? You can do that as well?

5068: 4576: 4513: 2035: 1883:, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at 1564: 3710:

Please can you stop removing WikiProject banners from talk pages of redirects? Quite a lot of projects like to keep track of redirects within their scope. (See

5028: 5019: 4486: 4477:

hi Nifboy, Your assessment work is appreciated. if you have the time I hoe you will join WP:USPP for the last 2 assessment rounds of the spring. all the best,

4433: 4407: 3661:. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the 1625: 1344:

Good luck changing anything on that page, every time I tried it got reverted by anon IPs (which I traced to Belgium, although that might mean exactly nothing)

437: 415: 4695:

if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see

3034:

Good one - this one had been deleted via PROD at one point, but we have now given it two reviews to demonstrate at least a sort of minimum for notability. :)

2866:

No there are no sociological repercussion for registration, and that's a blatant offense. You even admit it. Cease and desist!23:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

1597:

if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see

4909:

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 Knowledge (see

3488: 3470: 2397:

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 Knowledge (see

2369: 2084:

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 Knowledge (see

1810:

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 Knowledge (see

1734:

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 Knowledge (see

855: 77: 5408:

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit

4905:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 4691:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 4116: 2393:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 2080:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 1806:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 1730:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 1593:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 4301: 2381: 1706: 1139: 1104: 714: 612:

My complete apologies...I, of course, retract what I said. The anonymous user is the idiot. Sorry...blame it on me being tired and not paying attention. --

32: 4016: 1620: 5005: 4378: 4125:

Sorry, I kind of dropped off the map this month - new job, new city, etc etc. I haven't had a whole lot of time or energy to convert prose into numbers.

3503: 2043:, can you tell me the steps to do that? I have AWB installed, but have never got it to work for redirected pages previously. (It would be helpful for my 1718: 1103:

a while back that it needs to distinguish betweenf act and fiction. Could you please elaborate on the talk page what's wrong with the current version?

499: 1939:

Can you be a little more specific about how to pull up redirects/deleted articles still tagged with Project banners? I tried to follow your description

414:

at Knowledge (which is ALSO a Comixpedia article that is an import), but for the dozens that have been deleted over the past several weeks and months.--

370:

stubbed, aren't linked to, aren't on any lists, and aren't wikified at all. In a million articles, they might as well have slipped into a black hole. –

5194: 4937: 3705: 3670: 1439: 1833: 1508: 5363: 4771: 4508: 4492: 4396:

about 20 subject matter experts who are assessing, but the Wikipedians are so consistent, that I really need your scores to measure article quality.

3905: 3826: 3541: 3187: 1003: 498: 5287: 4043:

on our WikiProject. Please choose 10 of the articles to assess. Use the link in the section title to go to the appropriate version of the article.

2440: 2112: 2010:

as "no change" and didn't log the redirected article at all. I believe I have everything checked as you say, #REDIRECT entered in "Contains" etc. —

5381: 5365: 4639: 4383: 4009: 565: 515: 380:

Sometimes I think of Knowledge as a black hole of information. Nine times out of ten you see only what you want to, the other 10% is Random Page.

5131: 5000: 2543: 2364: 1359: 5126: 4634: 4571: 3878:

Thanks for joining the PPI Assessment Team. There is a request for you to review some articles and a description of assessment logistics on the

3267:

If the kanji isn't already used, it should be copied as it is expected for any feature article since the work was originally published in Japan.

5261: 5177: 4766: 3856:

Nifboy, welcome to the Public Policy Initiative Assessment Team. I am excited to get started, the discussion of project details will be on the

3235: 1940: 1466: 1435: 1419: 1402: 1384: 1288: 872:, to give us some things to get our teeth into! If there are others like yourself, we might get several thousand articles on this CD! Thanks 5516: 5106: 5043: 4980: 4614: 4551: 4333: 4207: 2413: 2100: 2051: 1826: 1757: 1750: 1685: 1613: 492: 440: 3601:

Do you think this needs more changes? Or is there a other reason why you don't support it ? I would like to work to address community issues

3594: 3465: 3083: 3076: 2688: 1474: 1165: 510: 5063: 4655: 4134: 3979: 1701: 5165: 3857: 3616:

I'm still turning it over in my head. I'll probably post something later this weekend, now that my immediate concerns have been addressed.

299: 4272: 5423: 4876: 3562: 3321:

The current version of the guideline has be reverted. I hope you can help me gather consensus on the disputed versions of the guideline.

3206: 3054: 2599: 2425: 1465: 1367: 5190:

completely understandable if you don't have the time to be interviewed any more. But if possible, we'd love to hear your story from you.

4028: 2981: 5095: 5032: 4969: 4603: 4540: 4482: 4453: 4429: 4403: 4292: 4268: 4203: 3997: 3975: 3935: 3887: 3865: 3846: 3127: 2961: 2041: 1175: 1046: 528: 295: 3536: 1481: 1188: 624: 273: 5486: 5390: 5154: 4925: 4100: 3778:) articles are redirected but the assessment ratings are not updated at the same time. So just because a redirect is not tagged with 3726: 1414: 1397: 1379: 1325:

page. I really like this game, so I have trouble deleting information from it. Your comments help put things in perspective :). --

718: 699: 418: 358: 322: 250: 4062: 2663: 1535: 5282: 4640: 4047: 3249: 1393: 1375: 1222: 1196: 911: 263: 3610: 531: 3742: 2706: 1655: 1233: 1064: 1028: 902:

hacking / fan translation thing can be shortened into one brief paragraph, while the prerelease can similarly be made concise. --

282: 3379: 3199: 2712:

No, it means I support leaving it at 180 and I don't really care if it goes up to 200-220. I've edited my oppose to that effect.

1074: 774: 666: 653: 5349: 5266: 5211: 4812: 4772: 3747: 3029: 3005: 2987: 1674: 1670: 1651: 203: 191: 2969: 2023: 2014: 1989: 1975: 1966: 1041: 1023: 921: 384: 5328: 4478: 4449: 4425: 4399: 4288: 4264: 4199: 3993: 3971: 3931: 3883: 3861: 3842: 3595: 2626: 2621: 2258: 364: 345: 310: 5090:, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Knowledge is acceptable. Please go to 5027:, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Knowledge is acceptable. Please go to 4964:, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Knowledge is acceptable. Please go to 4598:, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Knowledge is acceptable. Please go to 4535:, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Knowledge is acceptable. Please go to 3639: 3625: 3285: 3262: 1386: 575:

article for example to include the recent BAFTA official announcement that made the whole British gaming community proud...

374: 5274: 5257: 2721: 2630: 2019:

Aha, OK, the instruction about making sure "Bypass redirects is off" was missing from your sandbox instructions. Thanks! —

481:

it gets responded to, it might help to avoid any further cycle of nastyness. I'll still do my best to be nice, of course.

256: 163: 4398:

On another note, are you going to Wikimania? I am looking for people to co-present with, so let me know if you are! Best,

3809: 3794: 3759: 3024: 642: 5114: 5051: 4988: 4622: 4559: 3589: 3016: 2935: 2873: 2852: 2838: 2818: 2803: 2789: 2775: 2761: 2652:

for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at

1689: 1368: 1240: 630: 3106: 3043: 5430: 5244:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to

3966:

The second experiment will start in November and you will be asked to assess articles and also provide feedback on the

3567: 3322: 3305: 2613: 1556: 1337: 1227: 397:

people decided not to bother with keeping the article here, and decided to put it on Comixpedia's Wiki instead. That's

4683:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 2593: 2555: 1585:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 255:

Hi Nifboy, I thought you should know that there's a bit of discussion about one of your reverts over on my talk page:

5110: 5047: 4984: 4618: 4555: 3657:

Welcome to Knowledge. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from

3424: 3090: 3057: 2517: 2494: 2475: 1348: 1128:

To meet the final demand of copy editing, I have been advised to ask different people to edit parts of the article.

733: 541:

Hey, yeah..umm, what exactly did you mean by "Fixing cat" on your last edit of this article? Where did I go wrong? —

4820:, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the 4179: 1421: 1404: 1033:

Hi, Nifboy. I've been thinking about a slightly different way to apply your idea to 1.0. You might be interested in

999: 962: 393:

Referring to the fact that 400 articles at Comixpedia are marked as Knowledge imports, I know what that means. That

216:

This URL below hold many of the Legend of Zelda comics and manga-novelizations of the games, which were translated.

5300: 4236: 4175: 4112: 4096: 4067: 4058: 3711: 3065: 2003: 1906: 1560: 1539: 967: 858: 704:

Hi Nifboy. Since you're a Wikipedian and also a member of Bisqwit's site, I'd like to direct your attention to the

2788:

That's an opinion, and it doesn't help the article. Also, I turned my resolution to your specs and it looks fine.

1442: 5353: 5253: 4902: 4187: 4033: 3697: 3466: 2860: 2851:

No, you said "an IP". You never had and never will (but maybe now you do) intention of being humanly respectful.

2846: 2522: 2457: 1460: 844: 5267: 4897:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 3245: 3010: 2911: 2635: 2551: 2385:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 2072:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 1798:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 1722:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 1495: 1477:

for the discussion, which will certainly spill over into larger issues. Your thoughts would be appreciated. --

713:

contains some information that you could get started with. In case you're up for some editing, see you there! —

4910: 4696: 3180: 2398: 2085: 1811: 1735: 1598: 1569: 1264: 1250:

Did you pass by Final Fantasy 8 and Final Fantasy X-2 for a reason, or did you not know they were featured? —

1107: 1089: 906: 763: 747: 606: 5206: 4852: 3949: 2068: 958:) a list of things that should be enhanced/added/changed to bring the article to a higher status? Thank you. 955: 935: 2749: 812: 347: 312: 64: 5102: 5039: 4976: 4917: 4799: 4610: 4547: 4353:. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at 4212: 3673:

to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the

3576:, you may be interested to know I have renominated this article for deletion. Your comments are welcome at 3460: 3278: 3228: 2405: 2092: 1818: 1742: 1681: 1605: 973: 545: 467: 3330: 3313: 2943: 2826: 2811: 2797: 2783: 2769: 2683: 2647: 1524: 1515: 1456:

the discussion for merging Pianta into Super Mario Sunshine is/was and show me if it was deleted? Thanks.

1362: 5481: 5465: 5409: 5341: 5304: 5249: 4241: 4171: 4108: 4092: 4054: 3775: 2907: 2902: 831: 710: 490: 473:

I know that sometimes we're blind to our own weaknesses, and I trust your judgment. I therefor give you

465: 245: 180: 3439: 3395: 3163: 807:

Thanks for catching that last bit, removing past vandalism gets tricky after a few legitimate edits. ˉˉ╞

694: 5345: 4046:

Also, as a thank you for all your help, I'd like to send you a small package of Knowledge swag. Please

3527:. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- 3484: 3102: 2268: 2173: 1971:

Ah, thank you! It was step 7 where I had the problem, I didn't realize the Logs function existed ;) —

1947: 1929: 1865: 1841: 1086: 940: 891: 876: 826: 5449:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.

3420: 1777: 797: 560: 103: 5490: 5394: 5386: 5158: 3413: 3406: 3070: 3048: 2929: 2577: 1329: 1019: 926: 723: 488: 463: 343: 308: 3967: 3913: 1160: 5182: 4792: 3750:

had a redirect-class banner on it, which I've since reinstated the two banners that do support it.

2452: 2352: 2276: 1429: 1034: 943: 896: 744: 631: 536: 232: 225: 1434:

Where can I find the discussion of updating the B-class grading criteria? Please post reply to:

4651: 4504: 3020: 3015:

You mentioned that the Romanji is just the run in with the English backwards. Could you explain?

2949:

Please note the above IP made a report on you at the AN3 board, which was quickly dismissed here

2939: 2877: 2856: 2842: 2822: 2807: 2793: 2779: 2765: 1100: 790: 752: 26: 3383: 2643: 1201:

Hi Nifboy - thanks very much for your prompt response. I'll begin working on it in the morning.

3326: 3309: 2617: 1794: 1666: 1642: 1627: 1552: 1486: 1245: 995: 984: 977: 849: 802: 705: 5310:

While all constructive contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, content or articles may be

5512: 4329: 4091:

Once again, thanks so much for your help and let me know if I can clarify anything at all! --

3168: 3098: 3061: 2977: 2831: 2727: 2679: 2531:

If I misunderstood something, or I did something wrong, please explain me at my talk page. (

1754: 991: 620: 602: 171: 4316:, about whether it should be deleted/merged/redirected/made into a bridge task foce between 4252: 3513:

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the

2734:

Wikipedia_talk:External_links#Should_reviews_be_specifically_considered_as_external_links.3F

2639: 1007: 336:

know and I'll do it again. Otherwise we end up saying a lot of the same things over again.

44: 43:) which has a lot of detailed information and transcripts (such as its own resources on the 21: 5454: 5240:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 5122: 5113: