User talk:Argento Surfer/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Galactus

The tug of war on this article has been going on for years.  :) BOZ (talk) 15:26, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Redlinks

Please don't remove redlinks (or "dead links" as you call them) from articles. Wikipedia:Red link is a guideline that explains why redlinks are important and shouldn't be removed, as long as the topic of the redlink is a notable subject that should eventually have an article on Wikipedia. On the article Scott Shaw (artist), you removed e.g. the link to Gene Hazelton, winner of a Winsor McCay Award and an Inkpot Award and author of the long-running Yogi Bear comic strip. Here, you removed a whome bunch of links to notable European omics artists. Please don't remove redlinks unless it is clear that they will never have an article because the subject is just not notable. Fram (talk) 08:58, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem with removing redlinks from cleanup listings and similar pages, these pages no longer need cleanup and often have been deleted through AfD or the like. Fram (talk) 13:43, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For all you've done over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Cleanup listing - keep up the good work! Cerebellum (talk) 17:45, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Power Ring move

I'm curious why you undid my move of Power Ring (DC Comics) to Power Ring (character). I was trying to fix some confusion between it and Power ring (DC Comics) (which I moved to Power ring (object), and you also reverted. This was the consensus reached during a proposal to merge the two. Any explanation for this (here, on my talk, or on the article's talk pages) would be appreciated. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:33, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Sure.

First, I checked the talk page before I moved them back. To call that a consensus for the moves is a bit of a stretch I think. It was primarily about opposing the merge of the two pages.

That aside, The names are actually based upon a previous wider consensus. First that we should avoid using (character) as much as absolutely possible. Second, using (object) can be ambiguous (see power ring for other objects). Third that (DC Comics) is the correct dab per the comics naming conventions. (Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comics).)

That the only difference between the two is a capital or lower case R is just fine. As was said last time, there are innumerable articles in which have similar slight naming differences.

Hope this helps. If you have any other questions or concerns, please feel free to drop me a note : ) - jc37 16:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Ra's al Ghul. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 20:16, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Dilbert books

Hi, IMHO you made a good call by prodding Words You Don't Want to Hear During Your Annual Performance Review. Assuming this goes through, feel free to nominate the others listed in Template:Dilbert books, except for those on the bottom line headed "Business books" which had some support at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Always Postpone Meetings with Time-Wasting Morons. – Fayenatic L (talk) 13:57, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Huh. They need another AfD. Let me know if you get round to it. – Fayenatic L (talk) 18:02, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Wizard Entertainment

Hi. Are you sure the url to the webpage you cited as a source for the material you added to the Wizard Entertainment article is correct? Whenever I try to click on it or cut and paste the url, it results in a server error. Nightscream (talk) 23:29, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

José Sanchis Grau

Please don't link dates as you did in the José Sanchis Grau article. WP:MOSDATE and WP:DATELINK clearly indicates that this is not to be done. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:06, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:16, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Elektra (comics)

Would you please expand upon how you feel the article is clear about the character being dead and then continuing her activities anyway? As I was reading through the biography I found no explanation at all. -- Fyrefly (talk) 14:04, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Infinity Mind Gem

With regards to The Infinity Mind Gem and Loki's Staff from the Avengers movie, its all but confirmed that what it was, i'll look for quality source i can link to so i can re-add my edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarlaxlecq (talk • contribs) 18:05, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Matt Landru

Hey, I think the minor character article you just merged into the List of minor Marvel Comics characters would fit better in the List of minor X-Men characters. Cheers. -Fandraltastic (talk) 20:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I didn't realize that page existed. Thanks for the heads up. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:57, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Andy Mosier

Hi, Argento Surfer. When an article is nominated for deletion for a second time, it is necessary to create a new discussion page rather than reopen the first discussion. I've sorted your nomination of Andy Mosier and you can find a new discussion page here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Mosier (2nd nomination). Kind regards, --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:41, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I've only done second nominations a handful of times, and it's been awhile. I didn't think that was quite right. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:13, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

2013 in comics

I've removed the tag, since it's consistent with the other articles in that series. No big! --Lockley (talk) 23:10, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Bedbug (comics)

Hey, I had to decline the PROD for this article (albeit after deleting and restoring it) because it's had contested PRODs in the past. I did take the liberty of nominating it at AfD though, so you can find that discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bedbug (comics). Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 05:42, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

RE:Advanced Idea Mechanics

Advanced Idea Mechanics (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

That was my error; sorry. Anyway, the article is still messy, and it has some trivia. Perhaps the list of members may or may not be relevant to general readers, who are aware about this subtopic. There is no way how I can help you, but find real-world development if you can. --George Ho (talk) 23:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Zelený Raoul

Hello Argento Surfer. I've noticed you've merged the article to Reflex (magazine) (I'm one of the creators of Reflex). I just want to let you know that the comics is independently notable and very popular in the Czech Republic. I don't object merging at this time, as the article was pretty poor, however, Zelený Raoul has some room for improvement. You can find a lot of very interesting coverage (unfortunately in Czech) here. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 14:14, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I stumbled upon Zelený Raoul while going through a list of orphan articles, and it was meager enough a merger seemed the best solution. I'll check out those sources and add the article to my to-do list. Argento Surfer (talk) 18:50, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Just a show of support and appreciation for your taking on the big task of removing long-uncited claims from WikiProject Comics articles. I'll watch to see if anyone reverts — some of these claims have lay unchallenged for years. With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 22:14, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah I just want to say great job on all your improvements to the comics characters articles. You're doing great work! -Fandraltastic (talk) 18:15, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

The further reading links

Hey, I think those little tables of further reading links are only for the characters that don't have their own articles. Those links can be used in the "external links" sections of the articles for characters who have them. Cheers. -Fandraltastic (talk) 21:27, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Ah. Well, I'm glad to hear that before I spent too much time on it. Thanks. Argento Surfer (talk) 21:32, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Good work!

		The Original Barnstar
		For your work at Bal Thackeray. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 08:34, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Fandraltastic (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks! And to you! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! --Tenebrae (talk) 19:33, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

TriiipleThreat (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Extinctioners

A tag has been placed on Template:Extinctioners requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Fortdj33 (talk) 13:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Mind MGMT GA

LOL! Just out of curiosity, does this have anything to do with Saga (comic book) being granted GA status today? Are you monitoring my edits? :-) Nightscream (talk) 21:51, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

At a quick glance the article looks fine, though the Critical reception could probably use some work/expansion.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:57, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

That's one hell of a coincidence!

Well, I'm certainly no expert, since Saga is the first article that I created and single-handedly written to achieve GA (and only the second article that I've mostly written myself since Miles Morales to achieve it), but let me make suggestions based on my usual editing m.o. and my past GA experiences. Looking over the Mind MGMT article, I see the following:

• The name of a source publisher and its online url are distinct. While there are some soures that feature ".com" in their name, like TMZ.com, or in some cases, editors may include the ".com" to denote the website of a publisher, like Marvel.com, this is not the case with others, like Comic Book Resources, which is the name of that website, and not comicbookresources.com. I see a lot of urls in the References section being given as the publisher name: Comics Beat, Comics Bulletin, Comic Book Resources, etc. I always present those publishers by their name, and not by their url.
• When citing an online news story or website, I only use the access date when the webpage does not have a visible publication date, and almost never use accessdate when it does have one, since I think it's redundant, and can conceivably clutter up the citation. However, this is mostly a matter of instinct and common sense on my part, and I don't know if there is a specific policy, guideline, manual of style or consensus on this, so I started a discussion on it at the web citation template's talk page. However, even if you use both, I believe the publication date should be placed in parenthesis after the author's name (as I indicate below), and the access date at the end of the cite, since I think that's how the cite templates present them.
• Although I sometimes use the comics cite template, and some times list the publication info "naked", even when I do the latter, I try to write the citation info so that it will be displayed in the same way as it would if I were using the template: Author's surname, Author's given name (Date). [url Story title]. Publisher name. You can see this in the Saga and Mile Morales articles. I also think I may have read somewhere that it is preferred that citations be written consistently in an article, so they should be written either all with or all without the template (and come to think of it, those two GA articles are not so consistent, so I'd better change that myself....)
• I notice that the four issues of the series that are cited in the article (as citations 16-19, as of this writing) do not contain the writer, penciler, story title, or publisher. (I see now that Kindt is the writer and artist, so if he did all those issues himself, it could be presented as just writer and artist-- Kindt, Matt (w), Kindt, Matt (a).) Again, check out the Saga article for how this should look. Btw, sorry for all the initial focus on citation presentation, but fixing all these may collectively improve how the article looks.
• ComicsVine is essentially a wiki, as indicated by the "Edit this Page" button in the upper right, so it's not reliable under WP:USERG. A book can serve as a primary source for things like its name or its content (plot, credits), so I don't think you need a cite for that passage currently being supported by the ComicsVine cite, but if you really want one, then I would find a different one, like perhaps a review of that book.
• A minor point, but stories and storylines are quoted, whereas names of books are italicized. Also, when using a period or comma at the end of a phrase that is quoted or italicized, I believe the comma or period should be placed after the closing quotes or italics, unless that punctuation mark is actually a part of the formatted phrase. I made on edit to the article in this vein to show you an example.
• You could beef up the Lead section a bit by adding (just the most salient) details from the Publication history and Critical reception sections, though making sure not go overboard with them.
• I notice that there is no Characters section in the article. You should add one in between the Plot and Critical reception sections, since that's User:Wizardman, who made the last review suggestions for Saga, explained they be arranged.
• Speaking of which, you should check out the GA review page for the Saga article, and see what suggestions were made there. It might give you some more ideas. If you're really hungry for more, you could also check out the article's first nomination page. Although that nomination process was aborted due to a personal squabble that arose between myself and that reviewer, prior to this, he made quite a few valid suggestions, and I implemented all of the ones that I could understand and did not disagree with. Once you've implemented some of the changes I've suggested or which you've gleaned from those pages, you could go ahead and nominate the Mind MGMT article, since that pretty much garners suggestions and constructive criticism from the reviewer. But if you don't feel you're ready to nominate (though there's no reason you should be reluctant to do so), you could ask User:Wizardman to give you some informal suggestions.

I hope that helps. I hope it doesn't seem that I'm focusing too much on things that seem rather trivial, as many of the suggestions I was given in the two GA reviews for Saga were indeed things like the clarity of wording for certain passages. Nightscream (talk) 22:42, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Your input is requested at WP:COMICS

—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 10:55, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Neutral notice

As a veteran WikiProject Comics editor, you're invited to a discussion at Talk:Marvel ReEvolution#Merger proposal. --Tenebrae (talk) 10:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Elastico

I have declined your PROD on this article - it has previously been PRODded, so if you think it should be deleted you will have to take it to AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:10, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Really? I looked through the edit history since its creation, and didn't see it mentioned. I added the Old prod full tag on the talk page, though. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:06, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Photo consensus discussion

Hi. Can you offer your opinion on the matter discussed at the bottom of this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:21, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Merging articles

You need to have a DISCUSSION before merging articles like you did for Cardiac and Cannonball. Spidey104 18:00, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Requesting your opinion

Hi. Can you offer your opinion on a photo in this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:54, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

MIND MGMT GA review

Hi Argento Surfer, I've begun a GA review for MIND MGMT. Since it's been a while since you've edited, I wanted to ping you first to see if you're still active. Sorry you've had to wait so long for a review--hopefully we can get this one across the finish line and make your wait pay off. -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:39, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

• I am still active, but on a less regular basis. While this is going on, I'll check in at least once a day. Thanks for taking the time to go over it! Argento Surfer (talk) 21:49, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to bring MIND MGMT to Good Article status. Thanks, and keep up the good work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:13, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

And thanks, too, for your terrific efforts to clean up Wikipedia's backlogs for comics articles. My experience is that many Wikipedia editors like to slap cleanup tags onto articles; few actually do the hard work to remove them. I appreciate your being one of the second kind!

Is this your first GA, btw? -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:19, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

I got involved in the clean up as a way to stay busy when work was slow. I recently got a promotion, which is cool, but it means my editing time has been drastically reduced. And yes, this is my first GA. Thanks for helping me get it there! Argento Surfer (talk) 15:03, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure. Congrats on your promotion! Hope we'll still get the occasional GA out of you nonetheless. =) -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:13, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about 1885 in comics

Hello, Argento Surfer,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether 1885 in comics should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1885 in comics .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 00:26, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about 1908 in comics

Hello, Argento Surfer,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether 1908 in comics should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1908 in comics .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 04:01, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Photo consensus discussion at Talk:Rick Remender

Hi. Can you offer your opinion regarding the Infobox photo discussion here? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 19:20, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

RfC

This is a neutral request for comments at Talk:Ms. Marvel#Requested move 2. All participants in the first request are receiving the same notification.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:04, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Deletion discussion

A new version of American Son (comics) has popped back up. Please post your opinion on the discussion page. Thank you. Spidey104 15:15, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Black Spectre for deletion

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.--Crazy runner (talk) 14:52, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you, Argento! And if I know my Latin, you're having a Christmas with "Silver Bells"! Happy holidays to my good colleague! --Tenebrae (talk) 20:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Infobox Photo Discussion

Hi. Can you offer your opinion in this discussion regarding the better photo for an article Infobox? Thanks, and Happy Holidays. Nightscream (talk) 23:49, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Discussion on a source for comics articles

Hi. Your opinion could be very useful in this discussion. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 12:48, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Spawn and Savage Dragon

Alex Wilde and The Dragon: Blood & Guts are up for deletion so if you wish to participate in the conversation for or against deletion or improving said articles be my guest. I thought you may be interested since you were in a previous discussion about said subjects. Dwanyewest (talk) 21:21, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Wil Wheaton photo discussion

Hi. Can you offer your opinion in the consensus subthread of this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:09, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Gendered vs animate

Wasn't the original dispute about animate vs inanimate language, rather than gendered language? It came up specifically with the issue of "who" vs "that". Perhaps the RfC could be amended with a note clarifying this? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 06:09, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Was it? To be honest, I don't see any distinction between the two, but I can add a note. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:19, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I brought it up, because someone brought up transgendered characters, etc, and the guidelines on how to handle them, which is pretty unrelated to "who" vs "that". Ijust didn't want to see the discussion get derailed over a separate, highly-contentious issue. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 13:39, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Ah! I missed that. Good thinking. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:32, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Infobox photo discussion

Hi again. Happy New Year. Can you offer your opinion on which photo is better for the Infobox here? If you're not able to participate, just disregard this message; you don't have to message me. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 01:04, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Ryan Hill

As an FYI, I did an 'undo' of your redirect. More detail is in the talk section, but thought I would let you know.RonSigPi (talk) 22:43, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Your post here made me laugh. :) DangerousJXD (talk) 00:38, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Spoilers on Infinity Gems

My apologies for spoiling things for you, and two thoughts. I will attempt to choose my words more carefully here so as to not spoil things further.

1) I didn't consider that a spoiler - there's been a lot of speculation that that was an Infinity Stone, and I didn't think that revealing where/when it was canonically confirmed would be consider at the level of being a spoiler. My apologies that our definitions of "spoiler" are not in agreement, and I'll plan to go with a more conservative definition of "spoiler" in the future.

2) I presume there's no such thing as spoilers within the bodies of relevant articles (e.g., the A:AoU film article is necessarily going to spoil the whole film), so is it the putting potentially spoilery information in the edit description what you're concerned about? Is there a way you think I could've worded the edit description to fit the WP policy of describing edits without revealing a spoiler? Honestly, I'd prefer to err on the side of describing edits well even if it should be spoilery, and leave it to other Wikipedians to avoid potentially spoilery topics, but if there's a way for me to both avoid spoilers and give edit descriptions, that's preferable to me. I'm just not sure how I could've done that here.

Again, my apologies, and thanks for taking the time to point it out to me. --zandperl (talk) 15:38, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Merge proposal

I appreciate your comment, but could you post it to the official merge proposal discussion? Thank you! Spidey104 15:17, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Superman Input

Hi, I'm proposing using Alex Ross' image of Superman in the Superman article's infobox. The proposal on the talk page can be found here. Please let me know what you think. Thanks! JosephSpiral (talk) 13:40, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Do you think there is enough consensus for the change? JosephSpiral (talk) 22:50, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I think there's enough support that you wouldn't get any pushback for changing it, but you may want to offer some more options per the last comment from DarkKnight2421. A google image search for "Superman" portrait" has some other good pictures by other artists. The RFC's for picture changes I've seen usually offer 3-4 choices, although I don't think there's any rule (or even a guideline) requiring that. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:24, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I personally haven't found any that are as good as the Ross one. But I'll wait a bit and see if anyone offers others. JosephSpiral (talk) 14:38, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Dark Matter (comics)

I have all 4 comics.... perhaps you should re-read them.

Issue 2 page 20.... the "unnamed boy" is referred to as *she*.

Also, of the four characters - Griffin, Race, Ryo and Marcus - I'm curious which you think is female?? I realise Ryo *occasionally* appears somewhat feminine but often appears more masculine.... furthermore Ryo is a male name (apparently it can be unisex but is more commonly male) and when he separates from Griffin & Jace toward the end of issue one - when they notice he's missing at beginning of issue two it's said "Where'd pretty boy go?"

So there are four men, a woman and an unnamed girl... I could email you scans of the relevant pages if you're still unsure but the only main cast changes (so far) made in the TV series was the sex of the android. Episode 3 of the TV series ended with same event at conclusion of issue 4, though the TV series added a couple of things which haven't yet been shown in the comics (but apparently they have access to material not yet published).

DngnRdr (talk) 12:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Even the very first link you provided the writers actually describe the crew as four men and two women (the "unnamed girl" being considered a woman and part of the crew).

DngnRdr (talk) 01:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. Thanks for the detailed correction Argento Surfer (talk) 12:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Redlinks 2

Where exactly does this say that redlinks are appropriate? 'Cause the examples of "when to link to a disambiguation page" actually look appropriate here... Cebr1979 (talk) 21:04, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Or did you just go to my edit history and look for something to revert because you know I had a "run-in" yesterday with an editor you work with regularly? Your edit history doesn't seem to show any type of interest you would have in a page like Marjolein Beumer... I'll wait 24 hours for you to respond and then go fix your mistake again.Cebr1979 (talk) 21:19, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

First, assume good faith. Your attitude isn't conveying that. When I saw you being accused of "widespread deletions", of course I looked at your edit history. When I saw an edit summary that seemed innappropriate, do you think I should have looked the other way? This is a group effort.

Second, did you scroll down on that link and read the list of times when linking to a DAB page is appropriate? I have to assume not, so I'll enumerate them here:

The exceptions, when an intentional link to a disambiguation page is appropriate, are:

• Disambiguation hatnotes
• Links from one disambiguation page to another for further disambiguation
• Links from set indexes
• Exceptionally, in a "See also" list of interesting internal links where several different articles might be of interest to the reader and multiple ones are listed on the disambiguation page.

Which of these, specifically, do you think applies to Moes (TV Series) in the context of a list? Because I don't think any of them can be construed as supporting your edit. Even still, it should be linked specifically to the DAB so others know it's intentional, not redirect there. That's explained under the list of exceptions.

Futher, this is from the first paragraph of Wikipedia:Red link:

A red link, like this one, signifies a link to a page that is either non-existent or deleted. It is useful in editing article text to create a red link to indicate that a page will be created soon or that an article should be created for the topic because the subject is notable and verifiable. One study conducted in 2008 showed that red links helped Wikipedia grow. Follow-up work on this indicated that the creation of red links prevents new pages from being orphaned from the start. (emphasis mine)

So, yeah, redlinks are better than DAB pages. In fact, they're a good thing period.

Finally, I think you should dial back your language. Are you aware you're coming across to other editors as hostile and unfriendly? Argento Surfer (talk) 12:31, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

• Exceptionally, in a "See also" list of interesting internal links where several different articles might be of interest to the reader and multiple ones are listed on the disambiguation page.

That totally applies! Better to link the DAB page that at least gives a sentence or two than to a redlink that gives a... big... whopping... uhm... oh, what... nothing! Lol

"Period!"

And don't tell me what to "dial back." Except, of course, your revert I'll need to correct later today.Cebr1979 (talk) 15:51, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Uh, can you explain your reasoning there? Because a 'filmography' section is not at all the same as a "see also" section. Are you honestly making the claim that people interested in Marjolein Beumer's career have a direct and obvious interest in a fiction bar from The Simpson's and a restaraunt? Becuase that's just silly.

You seem to be saying the "2008 Dutch TV series" descriptor on the DAB page is more helpful to people than a redlink. That's not a valid reason per the list above. The 2008 portion is already provided on the Marjolien Beumer page. If your sole purpose is to help people find out it's a dutch tv series, why not just add those three words to the article?

I tried my best to be helpful here. I don't know why you insist on being unpleasant. Argento Surfer (talk) 16:45, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Just want to say thank you for starting a discussion first before reverting my edits. Even though we may have a difference of opinion, its nice working with such cordial editors. -- TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:37, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Cebr

Who is this lunatic? Check out my talk page revision history---he's launched an all-out assault. He might do the same to you if you keep talking about him. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 12:57, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

• Ah ... I see above you're already on his shitlist. Have fun with the delusional deluge that's sure to continue ... Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 13:01, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

The MoS on animate pronouns: say or nay?

I'm messaging you solely because I was told that not all of my pings went through, and I hit all the "nay" sayers as well. You've made your position so clear that I am confident that I am not misinterpreting it, but just in case, this is to inform you that your name has been cited on a list of Wikieditors who hold the opinion that the MoS should explicitly state that animate pronouns are standard for fictional characters. If this is not correct, please feel free to remove or alter the entry. Darkfrog24 (talk) 03:30, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :) BOZ (talk) 18:52, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Hm

I rush because my daily life is VERY busy from school to work and to home so i try MY best to make edits more sutiable which i am trying to do but the that Anon kid is making it hard for me to post Factual information because the stuff he or she places is outdated in the comic books so you know i am updating it. Beyonder (talk) 13:49, 2 March 2016 (UTC)BeyonderGod

Your submission at Articles for creation: Archie vs. Predator has been accepted

Archie vs. Predator, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SwisterTwister talk 06:09, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Batman#Genius intellect

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Batman#"Genius intellect". DrRNC (talk) 02:32, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Adam Warlock

Excellent work at that article! I hadn't realized how bloated with in-universe minutiae the PH had been. My compliments. There are a lot of WIkiProject Comics articles that could use your hand. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

My compliments on additions you made to the Adam Warlock page. The character is close to my heart and seeing it better written made me smile. More CosmicClowns though.... :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by YourGloriousLeader (talk • contribs) 14:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I have all those issues of adam warlock ff 66 67 and Thor 165 166. If you go back Adamwarlock brakea out of the cocoon only on the last page of issue 67. The majir grading comoany CGC even recognizes Thor 165 as HIMs first full appearance and Not the ff issues. Its like trying to say Wolverines 1st full appearance is Hulk 180 and not 181. Almost every comic expert will agree with what I am saying. Arionapollo (talk) 02:05, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for the misspellings..typing from my phone Arionapollo (talk) 02:07, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

I have them too. Old Wizard magazines note that FF 66 is a cameo, and FF67 is the first appearance. Marvel says his first appearance was FF 66 and per this, CCG shows the first appearance is FF67. After a few quick Google searches, all I could find was this article saying the first appearance was Thor, but he provides no evidence at all and is trying to make money off of it. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:40, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Check on ebay and look at a few cgc books where they say ff 67 "first appearance of HIM in cameo." And Thor says first full appearance of HIM. Or better yet call cgc to confirm. Arionapollo (talk) 20:35, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

eBay and CGC do not have the final say on stuff like this, and the publication history section of Wikipedia isn't the right place to parse that kind of thing anyway. It's a list of comics that feature the character without making judgments on what's a cameo and what's a real "first appearance". Argento Surfer (talk) 22:28, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Never said ebay has any say. Cgc does though as does Overstreet who are considered the experts by the majority overwhelmingly. Arionapollo (talk) 22:39, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

I've taken this discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#First Appearance vs Cameo to get other opinions. Feel free to weigh in over there if you feel I haven't presented your case properly. Argento Surfer (talk) 23:35, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Interesting discussion. Should mention wolverine too making a one panel appearance in hulk 180. And 181 which cgc and Overstreet consider to be his first full appearance. But we need experts to give their two cents too. Arionapollo (talk) 17:49, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Archie vs. Predator

The article Archie vs. Predator you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Archie vs. Predator for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aoba47 -- Aoba47 (talk) 05:01, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Archie vs. Predator

On 30 May 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Archie vs. Predator, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when the Archie vs. Predator comic was first announced, many media outlets noted in their headline that the news was not a joke? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Archie vs. Predator. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Archie vs. Predator), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Resident Alien (comic book)

On 13 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Resident Alien (comic book), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the title for the Resident Alien comic book came from a conversation Peter Hogan had more than 20 years prior to publishing it? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Resident Alien (comic book). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Resident Alien (comic book)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:11, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Tenebrae (talk) 16:01, 20 June 2016 (UTC)Rachel Rising and Alex + Ada

Happy to do anything to help. And congrats on the promotion!!! --Tenebrae (talk) 16:01, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alex + Ada

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Alex + Ada you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Carbrera -- Carbrera (talk) 00:21, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alex + Ada

The article Alex + Ada you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Alex + Ada for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Carbrera -- Carbrera (talk) 01:21, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alex + Ada

The article Alex + Ada you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Alex + Ada for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Carbrera -- Carbrera (talk) 22:21, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for The Fade Out

On 3 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Fade Out, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ed Brubaker and Sean Phillips turned down offers for the film rights to their comic The Fade Out because they were afraid accepting them would affect the way the book was written? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Fade Out. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Fade Out), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:33, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Superman

There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Persistent OWN behavior despite multiple editors' warnings regarding an issue in which you participated in talk-page discussion. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:42, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Doctor Octopus

I removed that material as the IP who added it has a reputation for adding false information to articles using bogus references and has been blocked for this on the various IPs he uses. This addition fits his pattern, I trust nothing he adds that I can't immediately validate. So far what I can check turns out unsupported. Check ranges 190.237.143.0/24 and 190.237.183.0/24. If you are willing to stand by that addition, I will, of course defer to your judgement. But just an FYI. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, I've removed the content. I'm pretty sure the info is accurate, but I'll dig up some old Wizards and verify myself. Argento Surfer (talk) 15:39, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Comic Book Character Infobox addition help request

I want to start adding a relatives part to each comic book characters relatives on there info box starting with the X-Men since they will be the easiest. I will experiment with the best look but, I want it to be just like how famous peoples relatives are listed so why not for fictional characters as well. I will also experiment with names and codenamed and maybe a slash so both can be shown more like discuss what would look best. I was wondering if you could please help me to get this onto the template that would be awesome. I feel that this would make a great addition to the info box for comic book characters.

Fluffyroll11 (talk) 23:06, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Giving You the Best That I Got (album)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Giving You the Best That I Got (album). Legobot (talk) 04:25, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 2 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the The New 52 page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Comic Book Character infobox addition

Hey so I see your concerns but, is there a way we can come up with a compromise and set a set of parameters/guidelines that would prevent those issues from happen or decrease their possibility. I am optimistic about this and believe that it is desired information in the overview. So what do you say? Fluffyroll11 (talk) 17:18, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

@Argento Surfer: Can you put the RfC back on the discussion? Fluffyroll11 (talk) 14:45, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Axis: Bold as Love

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Axis: Bold as Love. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Overlink on Superhero debut list

I do agree that there is an over link on that page I only added it since that was the style of the article. So what do you recommend? Fluffyroll11 (talk) 17:09, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

@Fluffyroll11: I recommend removing the overlink, per WP:Overlink:Generally, a link should appear only once in an article. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:34, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

@Argento Surfer: Thats a lot of links I didn't create this article just trying to make it better which that would. but, who created this page in the first place or decided that formatting for the page? and How did it go so long without being fixed? Fluffyroll11 (talk) 17:38, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

@Fluffyroll11: You can check the page history to see who made it if you want. Overlinking is a common problem, and many editors are unaware of the guideline or do it accidentally. As for why it hasn't been fixed...WP:VOLUNTEER. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:41, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Creating New Articles

How exactly do I go about creating new pages? and not have them put up for speedy deletion? Fluffyroll11 (talk) 18:09, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

@Fluffyroll11: Well, the direct way is to search for the name of the article you want to create. At the top of the results, it will say "You may create the page _____", with the blank showing the name in red. Click on the red link. (Make sure you searched it with the proper capitalization - otherwise, the page will have to be moved.) Alternatively, you can click on a WP:Redlink that already appears in an article like this one. This takes you to the article creation page. In the empty edit box, enter the new article content and save the edit. If you want to avoid speedy deletion, WP:PROD, and WP:AFD, here are some quick tips:

• Review the Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion and make sure your article doesn't fit any of the categories.
• Find a good article and use its structure as a guide. If you're writing about a character, make sure you're looking at a character page, not a page about a comic series or a publisher.
• Have more than one third party source before you start. A sourceless article is an easily deleted article. One using only primary sources - citing only comics - doesn't make it look notable.
• Add Categories to the article. These are tricky at first - I recommend basing them off the source article you're referencing.
• After you create it, click on the "what links here" button under the Tools menu on the left side of your screen. Make sure other articles link to the one you just made. If none already do, go out and add appropriate links.
• This is personal preference, but I use adverbs and the word that as little as possible to avoid bias and convoluted sentences.
• Review the Wikipedia:Your first article page for additional tips.
• If you're unsure about any of this, create the article in your sandbox first. You can reach it by the link at the top of the page, listed in the same row as your name and talk page. I often use it to organize articles before I create the "real" page. If you want to go this route, let me know. I'll look over your work and give specific tips and critiques. Argento Surfer (talk) 19:59, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

@Argento Surfer: Ok I have decided I want to do the Dora Milaje first since for whatever reason the Black Panther's supporting cast doesn't have very many pages and I will model it after the Warriors three page. I will do it in my sandbox first ok. Does that sound like a good pan? Fluffyroll11 (talk) 17:24, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

@Fluffyroll11: Sounds fine. Do you have sources outside of a comic that discuss the character? If not, it may be a better fit for List of Marvel Comics characters: M. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:38, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of best-selling albums in the United States

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of best-selling albums in the United States. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Batman Image

Hi, Argento Surfer. There was a discussion a few months ago about the infobox picture of Batman on the Batman talk page. The current picture doesn't show his full costume and while it's suitable, it was agreed that it isn't the best image since it's a profile rendering and impedes view of his costume. I found this image which is promotional art for Batman: Rebirth #1 (June 2016). It's drawn by Jim Lee and shows the full costume in frontal view. I started a discussion regarding the image on the Batman talk page as a potential candidate for the infobox. Your input would be great appreciated. Thanks, DrRC (talk) 20:24, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Arrow (season 1)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Arrow (season 1). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Cover of The Dark Knight Returns

Hi, your input in this matter would be greatly appreciated. Essentially, the cover of The Dark Knight Returns has been overused in too many articles and is being considered for deletion in many articles. I for one believe we should keep it in the Batman and The Dark Knight Returns articles. Thanks for your time! DrRC (talk) 20:57, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Into You (Ariana Grande song)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Into You (Ariana Grande song). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

My first article

Hey want to take a look at my first article? it's Redwing (Marvel Comics). Fluffyroll11 (talk) 02:52, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

@Fluffyroll11: The lead is nice. I italicized the movie title and removed the External Links and Alternate Versions sections. Those can be replaced with content when you have it, but empty sections aren't needed and (I think) look bad on the page. I also created the talk page, which is easy to forget. You'll always want to add the comicsproj template though, because it connects the article to the project and helps alert other interested editors that it exists. As you fill out the biography (I assume you're planning to?), be sure to cite the individual issues. Primary sources are better than no sources, but you should also try to find some third party ones. Maybe an interview with someone from the film talking about why they made it a drone, or a reviewer who has an opinion about the change. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:30, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

@Argento Surfer: Yeah I mostly created the page because it made no sense why he didn't already have a page. I noticed Lockjaw and Zabu had pages but, Lucky the Piazza dog had a page? he is only a few years old. So I decided that Redwing would be perfect as y first article so I can learn how to do it right before I create the dora milaje and other pages. Thank you for the advice and help. Fluffyroll11 (talk) 15:33, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

@Fluffyroll11: Happy to help. Argento Surfer (talk) 15:37, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

@Argento Surfer: Hey can you take another look at the page this time to help me make it so it doesn't become a redirect again? Fluffyroll11 (talk) 14:07, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

@Fluffyroll11: Have you been able to find any 3rd party sources you can add? That would help a lot. The only difference between the current version and the redirected one is the powers and ability section that has zero sources. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:15, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

@Argento Surfer: Yes added them just now. Fluffyroll11 (talk) 14:20, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

@Fluffyroll11: The two sources you added are comic books featuring the bird, and are what we call primary sources. If you want to avoid a redirect, you'll need to establish notability with second and third party sources, i.e. a writer talking about how he chose to use the bird in a story, a Howard Mackie interview talking about the drone, or a reviewer talking about why the change was awesome or awful. The first two examples are secondary, the third is tertiary. See Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources for more information.

I did a google search for redwing is a drone in captain america civil war and found this and this. I can't view them at work (internet filter), but they may have something in it you can use. Other searches/results will hopefully turn up additional information. Argento Surfer (talk) 15:34, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Thank Me Later

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Thank Me Later. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Fade Out

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Fade Out you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 13:01, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (music)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (music). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 12 September 2016 (UTC)