NeoThermic

As per request, I declaire my talk page open for talking. I'm not sure why you would want to, but its here, sort of like the appeal of fresh concreate and writing your name in it... NeoThermic 17:15, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi...you probably know your way around here, so I'll spare you the welcome message. :D — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 28 June 2005 18:07 (UTC)

GNAA VfD

Heya, I felt that it's best to message you personally. Firstly, I'm glad that you understand that there is nothing personal in my decision to discount your vote! However, I want to say this to you personally, and encourage you to continue to edit Wikipedia. My discounting of your vote was not a punishment for not editing much, it was because I must be consistent with my VfD policy for that VfD only. The fact is that I considered whether to readd your vote based on what you said, but I am concerned that this will open the floodgates to trolls and those who believe that the discounting criteria is wrong.

So I just want to say that, though I would normally give your vote weight on a vote for deletion, the GNAA is not an ordinary article or ordinary VfD as it is the sixth attempt. So that I don't seem to favour you, I can't count your vote :( I guess what I'm trying to say here is that I want to, but am constrained against it. Which sucks, but if people had played by the rules in the first place I would not have had to make hard decisions like this one :( Unfortunately, because of the stupidity of some, your vote has been effected. Ta bu shi da yu 9 July 2005 04:06 (UTC)

I see I've not lost my ability to change people's minds :) I accept that you have to have accountable votes for this VfD, seeing as its been up so many times. I do, however, have a suggestion for next time. Either they have 100+ edits, or they are a registerd user for at least 6 months since the beginning of the current month (so in the case of this VfD, you would have to be registerd no later than 31st Jan. That would allow the shy wikipedians the ability to have a voice, as its obvious that such VfD's don't crop up often.

I'm also glad to see the qualities that make you a good admin, and I hope to see more of it in the future :) NeoThermic 9 July 2005 12:55 (UTC)

An odd edit summary . . .

Given the lack of particular interest in talk, I'm not particularly concerned with removal of the Stardock template, but what did you mean by "On top of this, Stardock sells Uplink via SF, which is illegal." in the edit summary? GreenReaper 15:37, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't have time to explain it :)

The discussion on the talk page never came to a real conclusion, you're right. However, the main reason why I wished to remove it is that any version of Uplink: Hacker Elite being sold is illegal. See [1] For the full info on whats going on, but in short SF owe introversion unpaied royalties, which were accumalted before SF went bankrupt. Since SF hasn't paied, IV are suing for their losses. Now while we shouldn't bring legal issues on to wikipedia, I feel that we shouldn't allow stardock (who are selling Uplink: Hacker Elite illegally in this case) to be on the Uplink page. On top of that I have my own reservations of the size and unglynss of the {{stardoc}} template, but that is neither here nore there.

NeoThermic 15:59, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. Interesting. I'm not all that surprised, though. Strategy First caused Stardock some discomfort as well when they withheld revenues from the original Galactic Civilizations. That's the main reason Galactic Civilizations II is being published directly (and even then the distributor messed up, but it didn't cost nearly as much).

Please be wary about calling such things "illegal" on Wikipedia until proven in a court of law, though. Are Strategy First's actions immoral? Most people would say yes. But US bankruptcy protection is quite lenient to companies who are still trying to make good on at least part of their debts, and has a strict order of which debtors should be paid off first, so it may well be legal (if not nice) for Strategy First to do what they are doing. This probably depends on the terms of their contract with Introversion. I'm not an expert in international royalty law, and I couldn't find anything covering this situation, only the other way around.

I find it hard to see how Stardock could be doing anything illegal either way. Stardock, along with the other distribution channels, has a contract with Strategy First to distribute the game electronically in return for a royalty. Strategy First had the right to make that contract - and presumably retain it, at least for pre-existing contracts, otherwise Introversion would have said something earlier. This is likely to be an unfortunate detail of Introversion's contract with Strategy First. Stardock has lived up to their side of the deal. It is unfortunate if Strategy First is not passing that money on, but it's not Stardock's fault, legally or morally.

The only way I can see Introversion dealing with the situation is via Strategy First. However, I would bet that they have tried and failed to do this and are now trying to go after the secondary distributors. I just don't think it will work, as there's no compelling reason for them to stop selling it. GreenReaper 02:51, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Episodes of Lost (season 3)

I happen to have Episodes of Lost (season 3) on my watchlist, and noticed your edit summary. Please be courteous to your fellow editors even in edit summaries, per Wikipedia's policies on civility and not making personal attacks. Much obliged, and thanks! — Mike 02:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I had a lapse of courteousy to others after a long annoying day of work. I really should just stop editing in such cases :P NeoThermic 02:41, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

It happens to all of us — just go visit WP:SPIDER when you're in that kind of a mood, though. ;-) — Mike 03:05, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Must say, I've never laughed so hard at a wikipedia article :) Thanks :D NeoThermic 06:21, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Multiwinia

I did add a {{cleanup}} notification at the top of the page. It just means that the article needs some basic cleaning up as far as the structure of the material is concerned. Some recommendations I would make to cleaning up the article:

• Expand on the introduction (lead). It's way too short; it's only two sentences long. A typical lead should be two full paragraphs. You may want to look at the guidelines set forth in this newsletter for guidance about the lead.
• I changed the name of the "Backstory" section to the "Plot" section to make the section naming more consistent with other articles. Definitely expand that section if you can. Remember to include references, as well. For referencing plot descriptions, you can include a variety of other reliable sources such as instruction manuals or even the game itself. Look at WP:VG/S again on how to cite straight from the game itself (i.e. Quotes from characters in the game, stuff like that).
• Rewrite the gameplay as readable prose. Lists are normally not encyclopedic in nature. In addition, it can allow you to expand on how each of the gameplay elements work.
• Again, rewrite the development section as readable prose for the same reasons mentioned above.
• When the game gets released, watch for any reviews from game reviewers such as from IGN, Gamespot, etc., and create a "Reception" section using those sources.

That should get the article started onto a good track. In addition, I'm re-classifying the article from {{Stub-Class}} to {{Start-Class}} as there is more than enough material in the article that it's not really a stub anymore. Hope all this further helps out. MuZemike (talk) 20:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Also, if you can find a boxart and/or screenshot, be sure to upload them and inclued them in the article. Just make sure you add a fair-use rationale to each image you upload. MuZemike (talk) 20:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:17-35mm f2.8D small.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:17-35mm f2.8D small.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mosmof (talk) 06:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Uplink

Hey NeoThermic. Are you the same NeoThermic at Introversion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by George.Trimm (talk • contribs) 18:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)