User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 52

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Sergecross73. 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.

Archive 45

←

Archive 50

Archive 51

Archive 52

Archive 53

Archive 54

Archive 55

--UTRSBot (talk) 22:48, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

• Just Chilling - I'm strongly against this. This editor hasn't stopped socking in the 18 months since his block. He's previously asked for standard offer, only to get caught socking the very next day. Sergecross73 msg me 23:01, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks; I'll heed this advice. Just Chilling (talk) 00:48, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Hey Serge, I've been working recently to improve the page for Sonic '06. Could you help? I'm trying to get it to "good article" status, and I don't think I can on my own. (TheJoebro64 (talk) 23:52, 9 February 2017 (UTC))

Yeah, I'll definitely help. Honestly, I've been watching your work - Sonic 06 is on my WP:WATCHLIST, but I didn't want to "step on your toes". I feel bad that I'm constantly tweaking or changing your work on other articles. But if you want my help, I'll definitely do it. Sergecross73 msg me 01:10, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

How do you nominate an article for grading? Once we feel the article's looking good, I want to nominate it to at least a B. (TheJoebro64 (talk) 23:19, 13 February 2017 (UTC))

Stub through B class can be assessed by yourself. It's only GA and FA that requires other reviewers. Tomorrow I'll look over the article and leave some general thoughts/goals about the article though, if you like. I'll try to help more too. I apologize - as others can testify, I sometimes have a hard time with assisting others with their projects. When it comes to creating/rewriting articles, my attention span is short and constantly changing on Wikipedia. Sergecross73 msg me 00:00, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

I've tagged the page for reassessment, since it seems sufficiently sourced and doesn't appear to have major issues; just wanted to let you know. (TheJoebro64 (talk) 00:30, 17 February 2017 (UTC))

now you get it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonicgalaxy27 (talk • contribs) 06:57, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I now understand where you got the information, but there are still issues. I've explained on your talk page. Sergecross73 msg me 13:33, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

I guess — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonicgalaxy27 (talk • contribs) 08:20, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

This is a notice that a discussion you participated in, either at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 February 8 has resulted in a Request for comment at Wikipedia talk:User categories#Request for Comment on the guidelines regarding "joke" categories. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:38, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Dynasty Warriors Gundam: Reborn is the 4th game in the Dynasty Warriors Gundam franchise, and the only us released DW and DWG game that doesn't have its own page.

I don't know how to code and make these pages, and am using my phone to boot.

But can I please get some help turning this from a redirect to the first games page the merely mentions it exists. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dynasty_Warriors_Gundam_Reborn&redirect=no

and a second redirect that is what the page I tryed to make for it has been turned into that goes to a list of Dynasty Warriors spin offs, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynasty_Warriors_Gundam_Reborn

To it's own page with as much respect as the other 3 games in it's franchise and the DW franchise it's spun from?

Hi there. The reason it was redirected was that you didn't use any reliable sources. Articles, per WP:V, are supposed to be written entirely around sources, so you can see why that's an issue. Additionally, much of your original article, prior to another editor trimming it down, was written more like a Game Guide than an encyclopedia article. WP:GAMECRUFT covers a lot of things to avoid in writing video game articles.

There's a lot to learn with Wikipedia. I personally don't recommend jumping straight into article creation, or this may keep happening, but that's not something I can force. I would recommend reading over things like WP:5P, WP:REFB, and WP:VG/GL to learn more about editing Wikipedia articles. WP:ARTICLEWIZARD and WP:AFC may help you in creating articles as well. Sergecross73 msg me 20:13, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

The only reason I'm even attemptin is because a few years ago before this games release it had a page, but since then has been reduced to a couple sentances on Dynasty Warriors: Gundams main page.

If I knew how to pull up the page from 4 years ago and reinstate it I would but all dynasty warriors gundam reborn redirect to that small section.

I asked for help, my query got removed. I've asked agin, no one seems to care so I'm just trying to get someone interested who knows what there doing. I've recently lost my job, and am moving, and have no working pc so my time and resources are limited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RoseEclipz (talk • contribs) 20:53, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Did it exist under a different name? I can't see anything dating 4 years back in the page history. Regardless, the version from 4 years ago was probably eliminated for a reason too, so that may not be the best move either... Sergecross73 msg me 03:23, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Are you able to do this? Remy Ma is popular right now due her releasing a diss track. The page looks like it's getting some vandalism.--Jennica✿ / ^talk 20:24, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

I would have, but someone else got to it first. Let me know if it's an issue after the protection expires. Sergecross73 msg me 01:51, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Do you wanna help me improve the Spit (album) article? I wanna make it good enough to be a good article or maybe even a featured article (which would be very hard). Statik N (talk) 19:54, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

I'll look at it Monday. Sergecross73 msg me 01:49, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

In case you see this first, I left some notes on the talk page. Sergecross73 msg me 17:22, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

I improved the lead. What do you think of it now? Statik N (talk) 20:37, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm Sorry i keep making 2017 FIFA Interactive World Cup but sometimes i get excited about this and want to have everything sorted and easier to look up and i make this page terrible. I wont make this page anymore.

And about the darts stuff i'm sorry but i like darts and i want to have everything easier to look up. I thought this was a good way to make that happen but apperently not. If you want me to make it different tell me. And if you want me to stop making this stuff tell me that too. Then i'll figure something out to have it sorted for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garmt02 (talk) 20:57, 28 February 2017 (UTC +1)

It's fine that you like darts, but if you're going to be pursuing that interest on Wikipedia, it needs to be for actually writing articles - paragraphs of information. Wikipedia is not the place to replicate tournament standings. People can look that up fine from whatever websites you're pulling it from originally. Furthermore, any information you're adding needs to have a source regardless. See WP:REFB for how to add a source. It's not all that complicated.

Alternatively, if all you're interested in is strictly documenting chart positions in dart tournaments, there may be other outlets outside of Wikipedia for doing it - see WP:ALTOUT. I don't know much about the dart world, but to give a similar analogy: There are often editors I come across that say that they just want to write guides on how to play video games. That's commendable...but not what Wikipedia does. However, there are places on the internet to do things like that. Websites like GameFaqs or IGN allow anyone to write guides, for example. So, with some searching, perhaps there's a similar alternative out there for you too. Sergecross73 msg me 20:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2017).

Administrator changes

Amortias • Deckiller • BU Rob13

Ronnotel • Islander • Chamal N • Isomorphic • Keeper76 • Lord Voldemort • Shereth • Bdesham • Pjacobi

Guideline and policy news

• A recent RfC has redefined how articles on schools are evaluated at AfD. Specifically, secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist.
• AfDs that receive little participation should now be closed like an expired proposed deletion, following a deletion process RfC.
• Defender, HakanIST, Matiia and Sjoerddebruin are our newest stewards, following the 2017 steward elections.
• The 2017 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Góngora, Krd, Lankiveil, Richwales and Vogone. They will serve for approximately 1 year.

Technical news

• A recent query shows that only 16% of administrators on the English Wikipedia have enabled two-factor authentication. If you haven't already enabled it please consider doing so.
• Cookie blocks should be deployed to the English Wikipedia soon. This will extend the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user after they switch accounts under a new IP.
• A bot will now automatically place a protection template on protected pages when admins forget to do so.

---

We may need to keep an eye on Home video game console I just reverted an edit made today by a user that was placing Nintendo Switch as part of the 9th generation. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 08:57, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up. Yeah, there's probably going to be a lot of that in these next few days, with launch and all. We'll just have to be vigilant. I'll keep an eye on it. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 13:16, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Was there really no article on Wikipedia about this game until now? GamerPro64 15:02, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Ugh, no, I think I messed up yesterday. I moved it from Kid Chameleon (video game) to Kid Chameleon because everything at the dab page had been a redirect or unsourced article. However, it appears I somehow lost the page history in the move? I did have some initial errors in trying to do the move. I'm stuck on mobile for a bit but I'll try to sort it out soon if another admin doesn't fix it first. Sergecross73 msg me 15:25, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

That article is terribly written, so I certainly don't want sole credit for writing it in the page history ;) Sergecross73 msg me 15:38, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

I've restored the history. Probably restored a couple of unneeded revisions but that'll be ok, better to have the main history. :) -- ferret (talk) 16:43, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! Not sure how I managed to do that, but thanks for fixing it. Sergecross73 msg me 16:59, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

So I need somebody who can give these two (or maybe the same? the last editor has only worked on articles related to the game) users a warning, or perhaps lock the page long enough for me/you/somebody else to fix it without being reverted on sight. Notability at this point as been established, but the article is still a mess that doesn't follow general WP:MOS and WP:VG guidelines, and any attempt I make to fix that gets reverted for "trolling". ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 19:11, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Protected page, gave editor a warning about a litany of things done wrong. FYI, they've "reported" you to WP:DR - not that it matters, as they'd never take a "case" like that. Also, I tink it's voluntary, so you can literally opt out without consequence. Sergecross73 msg me 21:59, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not worried about whatever they try to do, I just needed some other editor to explain that it's not just me who would make these edits. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 15:32, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Just as well, the DR case was thrown out. But yeah, let me know if you need further intervention, as it seems there's been multiple editors who are aggressively pursuing non-encyclopedic additions to the article. Sergecross73 msg me 15:46, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey Serge, I've been trying to get Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game) to FA status recently. I need someone who's familiar with the page to give me suggestions for what needs to be improved; can you help? TheJoebro64 talk 12:10 PM, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

I don't really do much with the GA/FA process, so I'm probably not the best go-to on FA stuff. Personally - I see it as a bit of a waste of time, as most of your average readers don't value it, or even understand what it means. To me, it just slows down my editing efforts, having to wait for people to review my work, and argue with them over changing things. I just make articles as good as I want to make them, and move on to the next thing. (The only reason I have GA's listed on my userpage is because other's take my high B-level work, tweak it a bit, and make it a GA with minimal improvements needed.)

That being said, FA-status takes some really advanced-level knowledge of Wikipedia. With still being relatively new to the Wikipedia, I'd recommend you not take it on quite yet. (No offense intended, you've learned much since you've started here.) Sergecross73 msg me 14:08, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

I just wanted to ask you if it'd be a good thing to merge Sonic Crackers into Knuckles' Chaotix. The Crackers page is extremely small and has only three reliable sources (Sega-16 is not a reliable source, and Nintendo Player appears to just be a fansite); it seems like it would be better to expand the "development" section on KC to include Crackers. TheJoebro64 talk 9:30 PM, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I had tried to dig up sources 4-5 years ago in efforts to save the article from what I feared could be a merger candidate, but wasn't really able to come up with much other than what you've seen in it recently. Looking back, it does seem like they're mostly fringe-reliablity or passing mentions in RS's. I haven't been able to find anything recently either. I can't come up with a policy-based reason to not merge it, unless any other sources are dug up. Sergecross73 msg me 21:37, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey there,

Sorry, but I need some help/advice from an admin on the Koei / Koei Tecmo pages (and you're the only one I remember, soz) While editing the date of Koei being disbanded, an IP user pointed out that Koei, the developer, simply renamed itself Koei Tecmo Games Co. Ltd., when absorbing Tecmo, rather than becoming a newly established company called Koei Tecmo. I checked this on Koei Tecmo Holding's company site, and yeah, Koei turned into KOEI TECMO GAMES CO., LTD, meaning some of the information is written wrongly on these pages, and that would have to be corrected, but I digress.

https://www.koeitecmo.co.jp/e/company/group/#koeitecmogames (or the legal document https://www.koeitecmo.co.jp/news/docs/news_20110207_01.pdf - It's using the Emperor Date System, so, 昭和53年)

But... here's the mess; Technically, this means

Koei Tecmo should be moved to Koei Tecmo Holdings Co., Ltd., and Koei should be moved to Koei Tecmo Games Co., Ltd., right? As a normal user, I can't do either, as people have already created redirect pages a long time ago. But this would also mean that most of the pages linking to Koei Tecmo right now, should actually direct to Koei Tecmo Games - which, as I said, is Koei right now.

And that's, well, that's a lot of pages. Not to mention, the Koei page would need to receive a major overhaul, since it wasn't updated to accommodate this.

Maybe I'm missing something. Do you have any advice or solutions on what to do here?

Sincerely,  Kyoushu~  ►Talk Page  16:19, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm happy to help try to sort this out, but why don't we run it by WikiProject Video Games first. They're a good place to pose video game article related questions, and probably one of the most active Projects on Wikipedia. I'm only marginally familiar with Koei, they've made a game or two that I liked or would like to play, but I don't know a ton. It might be better to see if there's anyone more well versed with these companies, or how they've handled it with similar company mergers. (Square Enix comes to mind.) If no one comes to our aid, I'll dig in deeper to it all.

So, I recommend copy/pasting the bulk of your comment above to the WP:VG talk page, and seeing if anyone helps. I can do it for you if you like, but it's really no different than starting up a discussion anywhere else... Sergecross73 msg me 16:36, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Not a problem, will do!  Kyoushu~  ►Talk Page  16:54, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi there!

You had left some very valuable feedback on my first wikipedia page. I have tried to incorporate yours suggestions as best as possible. Please do have a look to suggest if its okay. I am new to this, hence keen to learn and contribute. Also, I realise when I type Melissa Leach wikipedia in google search then only I see her page, I was wondering shouldnt the wikipedia page come on its own the moment I type her name? Let me know if I have got something wrong.

Thanks and cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hansdar (talk • contribs) 20:33, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Hansdar - Hi there. Can you refresh my memory on when/where I discussed this subject? It's not ringing any bells at the moment... Sergecross73 msg me 22:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

I noticed you removed some empty entries, but not others. As it stands, "Shaddup You Face", Joe Dolce Music Theatre (1980); "Barbie Girl", Aqua (1997); "Faith", Limp Bizkit (1998); and "Stupid Hoe", Nicki Minaj (2011) are all entries with no text or references. If you are waiting for content/refs for these, ignore this message. Otherwise, could you please remove them? Thanks. 82.132.224.83 (talk) 21:07, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

If I only removed some of the blank entries, it was an accident. Any entries that lack context or sources should definitely be removed. Sergecross73 msg me 22:51, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi! Could you help me move JoJo no Kimyō na Bōken: Ōgon no Kaze (2002 video game) to GioGio's Bizarre Adventure? This game is consistently called JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (NA title) and GioGio's Bizarre Adventure (EU title) in English RSs (see refs in the article), and GioGio is the more preferable of the two due to the existence of JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (video game) and how it doesn't need a "(video game)" appended to the title.--IDV^talk 13:10, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Done! Just curious, since I was reading over the article prior to moving it - did they ever say what happened with the game's release in other regions? Or did it just disappear quietly, and that was the end of it? Sergecross73 msg me 13:28, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Seems it just disappeared quietly, yeah. Read some speculation that it was because of copyright issues, but nothing from any RSs beyond that "it's not at E3" from Eurogamer. Araki, the creator of the manga, likes to name characters and abilities after musicians and songs, which results in tons of renaming whenever a game (or the anime) does get released in English, so I could see this being the case.--IDV^talk 13:32, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Interesting. Thanks for the info. I've heard of Jojo before, but not Giogio, so I was curious. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 13:33, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, it's based on the fifth part of the series, which hasn't been officially released in English in any form yet, so it's not as well known outside of Japan and some countries that got their own translations, like Italy and France. I'm assuming it will happen sooner rather than later though, since the fourth part's anime adaptation wrapped up in December.--IDV^talk 13:43, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Good afternoon, Serge. A question for you re: WP:DR since you have a lot more experience than me.

Another editor reverted every word of six paragraphs - fully cited -- that I had added to a short article about a lighthouse and refused to discuss it. i.e. Gave some vague reason when I asked but then refused to reply when I replied to that. So I started Mediation. (No edit warring ... my content is still not in the article since he had reverted it all.)

If the Mediator sides with him, or proposes a compromise, that's fine; I'll understand.

But what if he refuses Mediation as I suspect he will? I have read WP:DR and did not notice any option if that happens.

Is there some WP procedure in a situation of that type? Surely this type of situation is not uncommon. Thanks, Peter K Burian (talk) 20:22, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, Peter K Burian. I understand your concern. That's honestly why I don't frequently use DR - it requires the other to willingly cooperate with the process, which isn't always how things go down. So there's three things you can do that come to mind - forgive me if you've already tried them, but you didn't mention which article you were discussing, so I can't for certain check and see if you've already done it.

1. Step 1, of course, it to start up a simple discussion on the article's talk page. Just a brief comment outlining what edit you tried to add to the article, and maybe why. If the person you're arguing with doesn't reply, you could always leave a message on their user talk page to alert them to the discussion. Good:This step is the easiest, and sometimes this is all it takes - perhaps they misunderstood or misread your additions. Or perhaps you made a minor mistake in content or source that just needs to be tweaked and re-added. Bad: If they fully do reject your edit fully, and its not a very popular article, you might still be stuck in a stale mate.
2. Step 2 would be to notify a relevant WP:WIKIPROJECT on its talk page, asking people to weigh in on the dispute. Note: its important to do it neutrally, or you'll get heat for canvassing. So, don't say "Hey guy, help me out because I'm totally right in this". Say "Please weigh in on this dispute, which is relevant to the Wikiproject" or something like that. Good: If a WikiProject is active, it often solves debates right away. Bad: Again, if its obscure topic, the WikiProject may not be very active either. WikiProject Video Games is always filled with experienced editors, where as the more obscure WikiProject Darts has seen two editors comment in the last 3 months, and would probably be far less helpful.
3. Step 3 would be to start up a Request for Comment. They take a little more to set up, but get attention from people outside of the content area. Good: By this point, I've always had any of my disputes solved, as far as I can remember. Bad: They can take a while if opinions are still split.

Those would be the 3 avenues I'd take. Like I said, I believe I've been able to solve most disputes I've been in, or provided assistance from, with those three. There's also WP:30 (Third Opinion) where you could potentially get help. But I don't recall ever using that one - only hearing about it - so I can't attest to how to do it or how well it works.

Let me know if you have further questions, I'm happy to help. Sergecross73 msg me 20:44, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Sergecross73. I did try WP:3O once, a year ago, but it was a very complicated case with many edits by both of us after the Revert problem began. The Admin really could not figure out what was happening or why. (This is why I am keeping the current situation simple - for a Mediator or 3O, this time; I had learned a lesson. i.e. In the current situation, I added content; he reverted it. I asked him to reinstate my content on the Talk page AND on his own Talk page. He ignored my request. I filed for Mediation. Period.)

In any event, if Mediation is refused, I will try your Step 2. I am not asking you to become involved but I could not think of another Admin that I could ask for tips on navigating DR. (I cannot even recall how I first "met" you but I had kept your name as a "helpful admin".) Just fyi, the article is Chantry Island Lightstation Tower. Kind regards, Peter K Burian (talk) 21:10, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Well Serge, obviously I handled the situation badly. My fault. Not sure I have any useful recourse now. Thankfully, this is not an important article for me. It was just the principle of the situation. A good learning experience.

  Reject. Fails to satisfy prerequisite to mediation #4, "The parties must have first engaged in extensive discussion of the matter in dispute at the article talk page and discussion only through edit summaries will not suffice". Once the conduct comments and allegations are taken out of the discussion, there is very little discussion about the content issues. It is, moreover, disturbing that the discussion began under a section entitled "Reverted all of my edits? Mediation to follow" (emphasis added). Dispute resolution is not to be used as a threat or as a substitute for adequately engaging in discussion on the article talk page and engaging in discussion in this manner evinces a profound misunderstanding of the purposes and abilities of dispute resolution at Wikipedia. Finally, if this request had not been rejected under prerequisite #4, it would almost certainly have been rejected under prerequisite #9. For the Mediation Committee

Peter K Burian (talk) 22:09, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Peter K Burian. Thanks for the kind words. Yeah, I recall us interacting in the past as well, but I also can't remember where/why. (Looking through your recent edits, it doesn't seem like we generally edit the same subject areas, so its hard to say.) Regardless, sorry things didn't work out for you. I guess I didn't mention above, but to clarify, in the whole scheme of things, DR is probably more of a "Step 4" - I imagine the case was largely rejected because it hasn't been discussed enough in other venues, like Steps 1-3.

It's up to you on how you want to proceed. If you want to discuss further on the talk page, I can try to mediate a bit myself - guide the discussion in the right direction, prod the other person into either discuss in detail or stop hindering, etc. Or you can just move on to other stuff if you don't really care about it anymore too. Discussions/arguments can be stressful and burn you out from editing, so it can be one of those "You need to pick your battles carefully" type things. Not that I'm trying to sway your opinion on it. Anyways, feel free to ask me questions on this, or whatever else you may come across in your Wikipedia editing. Sergecross73 msg me 13:34, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Serge. This was a useful learning experience on how not to handle situations where someone reverts every word of content that I had added to an article. last night, I did a smaller edit, adding a bit of content again, to see what happens. She did not revert it, just complained about it.

If you are willing to take a look at it, and perhaps try to reduce the animosity on the Talk page, that would be kind. Get us back to collaborating. Chantry Island Lightstation Tower. And if some of the content I added last night seems unnecessary to you, as the other User says, please feel free to delete it. Honestly, all I want to do is make the article better. (This part of Ontario is a second home to me; I have done a lot of work on several articles about the area; they needed a lot of work. e.g. Southampton, Ontario)

In another Talk topic, the User is now accusing me of prejudice too. (I admit I handled the situation badly when she first reverted every word I had added, with an overly aggressive approach on the Talk page, but prejudice because she is a woman??)

In any event, I have retained the suggestions you had provided yesterday and will review them if another situation arises in future. Cheers! Peter K Burian (talk) 14:56, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi there. Just wanted to let you know that a user by the name of NamcoKid43 created an unnecessary template called {{Franchises by Taito Corporation}} despite being fully aware that all Taito franchises are stored under {{Square Enix franchises}} I've provided a speedy deletion to the Franchises by Taito Corporation template, not only because it's a duplicate that came later than the Square Enix franchise template, but the fact that all the entries that are in the Taito Corporation, which are not in Square Enix franchise templates section of Taito are standalone games to begin with. Would you be able to keep an eye out on his activity, he also had a tendency to add standalone games to the {{Bandai Namco franchises}} template too, and I'm concerned that he may unintentionally go into spam territory with activity like this. Regards. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 20:06, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Iftekharahmed96, please stop FORUMSHOPPING. There are ways to go about changing/deleting/modifying a template, and asking everybody you can think of to cut corners for you is not how to do it. Primefac (talk) 20:23, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Well, its nominated for deletion, so it looks like things are being pursued correctly now. I'll recuse myself from commenting there, to alleviate any concerns about FORUMSHOPPING or WP:CANVASSING, but Iftekharahmed96, know that, if you're not getting much input at the nomination, you can notify WP:VG with a quick request for others to weigh in, though you have to do it neutrally - You wouldn't be able to say "Hey WP:VG guys, please help me get rid of this unnecessary template", it'd have to be more like "I'm looking for more input on this matter. Please add your input to the discussion" or something along those lines. Sergecross73 msg me 16:12, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

I never knew that ForumShopping was a thing until I got notified that I was doing it. I just really felt as though that the template was so unwarranted that I wanted to get rid of it as soon as possible, because a pre-existing template already did that job better. I apologise that I went about the process the wrong way and very selfishly. I'll take your particular piece of advice from here, next time I get in a similar situation like this Sergecross73. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 19:53, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Its no problem if it was an accident. Just basically, don't ask the same question in multiple places when you've already been rejected in another main area. That being said, I usually personally tell people that, if they disagree with my decision when they come to me for help, that they're welcome to try WP:ANI or other places. But that's more just if you're dealing with just me at first. Sergecross73 msg me 20:14, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

There is an ongoing discussion on whether infobox single and infobox song should be merged at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs. Your thoughts would be appreciated. Thank you. Erick (talk) 14:19, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! I left a comment there. Sergecross73 msg me 14:28, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Good afternoon, Serge. An Admin question for you.

I know that this is the type of citation format that WP prefers:

"History" (PDF). Waterloo Historical Society 1930 Annual Meeting. Waterloo Historical Society. 1930. Retrieved 13 March 2017.

However, is this shorter format acceptable to WP? [1]

Would appreciate your comments. Cheers, Peter K Burian (talk) 22:23, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The citation template is to help combat link rot and assist with a consistent reference format. It usage is a good practice, and you should use it if you have the time (Or use a tool like reFill to assist), but using a raw URL to source something is fine. Sourcing is more important than perfect CS1 templates. -- ferret (talk) 23:19, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you ferret In the past week, I have been editing SO many articles, I have used the very short citations and am getting beat up about it. I promised the other User I would go back to using the full format. At least your reply says I have not been a Citation Violator! (But I won't tell him your name, so he won't come after you. GRIN). Peter K Burian (talk) 23:41, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

One method is to just use bare URLs to start while you are editing, and when you're done, use WP:ReFill to complete the details. -- ferret (talk) 23:43, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Ferret, for your help. His advice is spot on. Yes, you don't have to format your refs. I don't. Sergecross73 msg me 00:27, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

That said, I would suggest to Peter that he take care to name and reuse existing references to avoid duplication, rather than specifying them multiple times. -- ferret (talk) 00:31, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

name and reuse existing references to avoid duplication, rather than specifying them multiple times. .... Yes, Serge, I should.... but in truth, I find that more time consuming than doing the templates. Isn't there some bot that will do so? Peter K Burian (talk) 02:03, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Peter K Burian - I found it confusing when I first started, but it's really not all that hard. To break it down, basically, you just need to come up with a little nickname for any source you expect you may be using more than once. For example, take what you'd usually add for a source, like <ref>www.bluelighthouses.com</ref> and expand it to <ref name="blueLH1">www.bluelighthouses.com</ref> or something. Then, to use that ref again in the future at the same article, you can just use <ref name="blueLH1"/> instead. Sergecross73 msg me 15:47, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

OK, thank you Sergecross73. I will try it later today. Peter K Burian (talk) 16:22, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello Sergecross73, I hope you don't mind but I was hoping to ask for your advice as I've seen you've been involved in other gaming/technology discussions. I have been trying to engage with an anomymous (IP) editor who is repeatedly making the same uncited edits on the Jaguar (microarchitecture) page. The editor has not engaged in the discussion on the talk page here and has become increasing hostile in the edit summaries. I am not sure how to deal with this without it degenerating into edit warring. I asked for help via Wikipedia:Requests for page protection but was declined as this is a 'content dispute', which may be true but if the editor will not engage and is increasingly attacking, I'm not sure what to do.

Any thoughts about what to do would be greatly appreciated. Dbsseven (talk) 15:16, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey there. I'm kind of surprised they didn't honor your protection request, but some Admin are stricter on their requirements than others, I suppose. Regardless, I understand your frustration - I've had all sorts of arguments with drive-by IPs about the tech specs of the PS Vita, 3DS, and other systems on the 8th gen article. They think their personal technical know-how is better than what the RS's say, and while, who knows, maybe it is, we still can't use that on Wikipedia. Anyways, the IP says they're going to drop it...though I know editors say that all the time, and then they're right back at it again. If they do come back, tell me, and I'll protect the article at that point, on the grounds that the issues still hasn't gone away, and that there is a long-term, open discussion about it on the talk page that they refuse to address. Sounds good? Sergecross73 msg me 16:21, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Sounds very fair. Thanks for the advice and help. Best. Dbsseven (talk) 16:42, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello again Sergecross73. A/the IP had returned again editing without citation. May I call upon your help sorting this out? Dbsseven (talk) 18:04, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

I've protected the page for a week.Perhaps that will encourage them to engage in actual discussion, and not just arguing through edit summaries. Sergecross73 msg me 18:11, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Is GameCrate a reliable source? It's a site owned by Newegg. TheJoebro64 talk 09:28 PM, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

I will investigate tomorrow. Sergecross73 msg me 00:54, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

I left some thoughts at WP:VG/S's talk page, where you originally started the conversation, to see if anyone would add or challenge my thoughts on it. Sergecross73 msg me 12:45, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

You might want to keep an eye on this user... I suspect it might be a sock of Sonicgalaxy27. This similarly-named account was created hours after he was blocked, and it re-introduced the same edit to Tails (character) that he did. It also made the same edit on Knuckles the Echidna. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 05:36, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Sigh, yes, that does look pretty likely. I will monitor, and likely block. Thank you. Sergecross73 msg me 14:06, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

After his most recent comment, I went from 90% sure to 99.9% sure its him, and have blocked him. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 15:10, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Twilight hack. Since you had some involvement with the Twilight hack redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Pppery 20:37, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Wow, took me a minute to remember that one. I've commented there. Thanks for the notification. Sergecross73 msg me 20:50, 22 March 2017 (UTC)