User talk:Ferret/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Dear Ferret

I am correctly adding the name of Jamie "James" Williams to the design credits. I am also puzzled why you choose to remove "Chris Tilston" but choose to leave Dave Doak, who left the project over 2 years before it was released?! While the game has fairly ambiguous game credit titles (to make it harder to poach staff), I think you'll agree that Jamie Williams having the title Manic Welsh Designer is a valid claim for being one of the game designers. The other person you removed "CHRIS TILSTON" had the credit "Designs on the future" and a simple google search for "chris tilston game designer" will show this. There is nothing in the wikipage about stating who was lead designer and other roles like composer have 3 credits to the role. It certainly wasn't Dave Doak who left 2 years before the game was released. Itismam (talk) 17:53, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

@Itismam The first two are explicitly credited, without joke titles, as the game's designers. All others are within the later joke credits, making their exact role unclear. Most importantly, {{Infobox video game}} dictates that credits not include all possible members, but instead focus on leads. As the other two are sourced as leading development, and given a proper clear credit, they go in the infobox. The other two however are not credited with a lead role, and fall in the joke-y portion of the credits. It's not a question of whether they are designers. They are. It's whether they are lead designers. -- ferret (talk) 18:31, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

FACT #1: The leadbox says NOTHING about lead designer. It says DESIGNER(S) by your own admission, the two names you omitted were that. So they qualify. All of the other positions are COMPOSER(S) and PROGRAMMER(S). There are 3 names under the COMPOSERS because 3 musicians worked on the score (and they've been submitted), so why exactly do you think the DESIGNER(S) tab should only list the lead in a game without one, yet the COMPOSER(S) tab lists 3 people, one of whom (Graeme Norgate) is not even in the games credits because he left years before the game was released and had a handful of tunes in the game? Why have you chosen to keep Dave Doak, while in the same wiki entry it says he left shortly after in 1998 around 2 years before the game was released and is not even in the games credits, surely the people who coded the game have the final authority on who worked on it?

As for Jokey credits, all of the names were Jokey, even Duncan Botwood was named as grey area. Even mark edmonds who was lead coder was listed as REALITY ENGINEER.

in fact, no one in the credits is listed as lead anything. And nothing in your titles says anything about lead anything. This is true for many other games I checked too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRdXiUwQjiQ

FACT #2: Dave Doak left the company YEARS before the game was even released and is not even in the games credits, but you're listing him as a lead designer for leaving nigh on two years before the game was released, but denying the other two designers who were actually in the credits?

This is all very odd and I'm not quite sure why you're putting up so much resistance, so if you won't add the names back as per credits in the game, I can take it to a higher authority and you can explain the same inconsistent logic to them as you have to me because nothing you have said makes any sense.

Just to clarify.

i/ You reward people who were not even in the games credits as leads.

ii/ You deny people who were in the games credits a credit.

iii/ You claim that the Job Titles are only for leads, despite them saying nothing of the sort, other games from other companies not following this rule and that tabs like composer(s) have all 3 musicians listed, yet somehow you have a problem listing all 4 designers, even omitting 2 two who were in the credits, while keeping someone who left years before?

If this is still a problem, I'm happy to take it to a higher authority, because with all due respect, you're all over the place on this one.

I'm sure you do lots of good work here, but I feel this is not your best moment which is why I took the time you explain and highlight some of your flawed reasoning.

Regards Itismam (talk) 00:23, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

@Itismam I don't really like to take this route, but I'm one of the maintainers of the infobox, and I deliberately linked you to it's documentation page for a reason. The popular names of the video game designers, i.e. people who worked on the game's system. The names can be wikilinked. This field is often unfilled in modern high-budget development due to large team sizes and collaboration. Older games and indie games are more likely to use this position. If a single person is credited as "Lead designer", list that person; synonyms for this position include "[game] design director" and "lead planner"; If there is no equivalent to #1, omit this field; If three or more people are credited as "lead designer", discuss whether any one played the most significant part and, if decided, list that person. These individuals are not credited as lead designer, so they do not go in the infobox, period. If you would like to argue that we should omit the field entirely, I am also ok with that. Appeals to higher authority fall a little weak here. Please, you may want to check who you're addressing. I am a fifteen year veteran of the Video Game Wikiproject, one its chief template maintainers, and an Administrator. I highlight this mainly to stress that I know what I'm talking about here. This is also a Featured Article, a particular ranking of a Wikipedia article that indicates it's been thoroughly vetted and it's content has a general consensus as is. So adding two new designers who clearly fail the documentation isn't going to work. I simply restored the accept status quo. Should we remove them all? -- ferret (talk) 01:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello again :)

Then in the interest of consistency/rules (which are important to stop chaos) I would respectfully suggest you ommit the names/field all together as per protocol/suggestion and in future I'll attempt add a complete credits list of the released credits list extracted from the verifiable, in game credit list to provide the service of listing credits in a critically acclaimed game (higher metacritic FPS of all time actually), without falling foul to the leadbox protocols.

Because at present...

You're crediting someone (Dave Doak) who left years before the game was released and was not in the games credits over two people Jamie/James Williams & Chris Tilston who were. With the SEO wiki has, its often the first thing people will see. I don't think its fair or right people who left years before something was released (and are not even credited) are credited over those who actually stuck it out and are credited.

I would also re-remind you the composer(s) tab has 3 people listed, none of whom were leads, and one of whom (Norgate) left years before the game was released.

But they are there. In the unlikely event that does not follow the same rules as the DESIGNER(S) tab, that should probably follow the same ruleset.

So can we find some common ground as I think deep down we're both advocates of rules and consistency that if nothing else my interactions with you has evolved the state of the composer and designer tabs and made this page more consistent with the guidelines you alluded me to and as I said, I can provide an easily verifiable dump of the credits lists from the released game so we're not falsely crediting some people as leads who were not even in the games credits list and left years before, while denying staff who actually were the in credits list a mention.

If EX Staff wan't to be referenced, they could have their own section and folklore.

The credits list is ultimately the most senior reference point of who worked on the game at release. Its coded and approved by the developers by people who did the really hard job of staying until the job is done.

Staff come and go. If they left, got fired or could not hack it before the game was released, then they do not deserve the same accolades of those who did. Certainly not more, which is what is going on at present with Norgate and Doak.

Hope this makes sense, congrats on your 15 years and taking the time. Itismam (talk) 10:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

@Itismam I think there's just one last thing to clear up here. You keep suggesting that I, ferret, did something wrong, that I, ferret am crediting people wrong. I did not add David Doak or Duncan Botwood (or Chris Tilston) to this infobox. They have been listed for years and I had no role in putting them there. I simply reacted the the addition of a new name, and made a quick review of the article's prose and the list of credits that I googled up, then removed names in accordance with the template documentation. A lot of people trip up on this. They make a change, and someone monitoring that article reverts it for documented reasons, and then we get bogged down in two things: They insist that one specific person is responsible for doing something wrong (Dozens of people have contributed to the article over more than a decade), and that because something else in the article has an issue, the issue they introduced is ok too (We call this WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). Because of Perfect Dark's age and just outright silly credits, there's definitely some questions here on how the infobox should be dealt with. Straight up by the rules, "Leads only" applies to all fields. I think the best step now is to move off my talk page and to the article's talk page, where more interested parties can engage in the specific question of what needs to change with that article. -- ferret (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

As a rep of the site I simply held you partially responsible as in fairness you did undo my edit and you represent the site at a more senior level than I do you so you will no doubt get some of the heat, its basically customer service. I mean, its not like I added anything bad to the page was it? I didn't try to delete anyone, and I didn't add any information which was false. I added one name and its invoked war and peace. Yet you seem strangely relaxed when it comes to acknowledging people who are not even in the credits. Interesting.

All I wanted to do was add one name to the design credits which is verifiable in the games credits, it was you that wanted to get technical that such an addition was a breach and it was only leads and there was nothing in the credits which defined this. Christ Tilston was then removed who was there before and after my edit, even though you conceded they (Jamie/James Williams & Christ Tilston) were or were likely designers on the game. As per the games credits, which while ambiguous, is a likely conclusion and easy to conclude as a bit of google stalking search lists Chris Tilston as head of design at smilegate barcelona and Jamie/Williams Williams at Dynamic3d.co.uk who is well known on other forums as an avid gamer who partially left the game industry but will works in the indie gamer field.

Even now you want to continue the saga further, even though in your last email you said the lead box was for leads and made out its not verifiable so removing all could be a good solution. When I agreed to this and suggested they all be removed and a simple CREDITS LIST added from the game, you're now making out this is a problem?

Why do you need to consult other people after 15 yrs experience Vs a very casual editor whose seemingly got you all tied up? is this typical of your interactions with users?

Do you think random people online in 2023 are more credible than the people who coded and made the game credits 20+ years ago?

I don't think you're interested or capable of finding a solution so if you can refer it your end to someone who can and I screen-grab and refer my end so people can see what I am up against.

Cheers Itismam (talk) 20:12, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure where you're going with this. We do not do credit lists on video games, nor did I suggest one. I've tried to explain our processes, policies and guidelines, and also pointed you to the proper place to continue a discussion about this particular article. Administrators like me do not have the last say on content, nor does my 15 years mean I just make decisions. Wikipedia works through consensus and discussion, which should occur on the talk page of the topic in question. That's why I directed you there if you want to continue this specific topic. If you aren't interested in learning about how Wikipedia works, you are welcome to drop the topic and stop replying. I'm good either way. :) Screen grab all you want. My talk page history is public, it's not like this was going anywhere rofl. -- ferret (talk) 20:28, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

There was no need to direct it anywhere, you should have been able to deal with it with your levels of "experience", it was a simple request and addition which has tied you up in knots and made yourself and the site look like an unhelpful, hypocritical farce in relation to what its supposed to be about. On a very simple issue I might add about a 20+ yr old video-game. God knows how messy it is around on something important and political!

You've allowed credits for two people who are not even in the games credits and deleted two who were.

And that is after 15 yrs experience and judgement.

Your claims of the leadbox being for leads is nonsense because none of the designers (as you pointed out) listed are leads with one not even being in the credits of the game due to leaving 2 years before release, and the same goes for the composers.

But still they remain, a shining reminder of your dynamic rule-sets.

These are the standards YOU mentioned in order to make the leadbox list, yet the names still remain despite not even being in the credits and them listed as leaving years prior. All I wanted to do is add a name from the credits for a role to go with the existing 6.

You've turned a simple addition into a disaster which casts a worrisome light on your role here and the site as a whole.

As for screen grabbing, you're right, I mean, websites never go down or vanish do they, especially ones who ask for donations? URL's never change? Admins or businesses never delete or edit content to make themselves looks better after a customer points out gaping holes in their standards and protocols and keeping source information to ONE SOURCE is always encouraged when preserving information.

Doh! Itismam (talk) 21:34, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Haha, ok, have a nice day. -- ferret (talk) 21:54, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Overwatch articles

Since you were into Overwatch, and would like to scrutinize often. I know these article are GAs, but could Hanzo (Overwatch) and Doomfist be notable? Other characters like Kiriko (Overwatch), Pharah (Now nominated at afd) and maybe Winston (Overwatch) were not. GlatorNator (ᴛ) 23:01, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

I kinda doubt it. But I do not have time to perform a proper WP:BEFORE at this time. If someone presents a list of sources they believe definitively show SIGCOV, I'm fine with scrutinizing. But the sheer popularity and scope of articles about Overwatch means that searching for true character sigcov is a nightmare. -- ferret (talk) 23:43, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Left 4 dead genre

L4d isnt a first person shooter. Steam describes it as action horror. Valve developers community cite it as survival horror. Stop reverting. 46.70.111.21 (talk) 14:35, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Those aren't reliable sources for genres on Wikipedia, as they are user-generated labels. So please stop changing it, so people can stop having to revert your disruptive edits. -- ferret (talk) 14:40, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

GTA: San Andreas' mobile paid downloads

Can we count this 1 million mobile paid downloads of GTA: SA from Google Play Store, here is the official figure from Google Play Store.[1] Kazama16 (talk) 09:22, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Direct Google Play store links have generally been rejected in the past. -- ferret (talk) 12:40, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Can we use this instead. [2] Kazama16 (talk) 09:19, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

That's just an archive of the Google Play store... -- ferret (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Sales of Call of Duty games

Hello. I have found many sources about sales of Call of Duty games and this one seems reliable.[3] Is it reliable? Kazama16 (talk) 04:09, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Dotesports is a reliable but weak source, that has been challenged before. Most importantly, they don't list where they got these figures. For many of the CoD games, Activision never released direct information on sales. For many years now, Activision has mostly just reported the *total* sales of the entire franchise. The 425 million total figure is correct, and our best-selling franchise article already uses that figure. The rest are questionable. -- ferret (talk) 12:55, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Michael E. Henry Chevalier des Arts et des Lettres

I have added this published reference to support my edit in the list of Chevaliers des Arts et des Lettres but the edit is still not published. In fact, I dont see the edit pending. What do I need I need to do? Michael Henry

https://www.facebook.com/franceinhouston/posts/pfbid02SJt4F6FaFuHZMi8BbQ7FH3d1bkhRPmhXoDoHkWqoPPigj23YtMkLfE6Qg8m7qyDl Cadeau22 (talk) 20:59, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Help with moving a page

Hello there, ferret! I hope you're doing well today. Look, sorry for bothering you right now but i need help with moving a draft i just recently finished (Draft:Panzer Dragoon Mini => Panzer Dragoon Mini). Again, sorry for the inconvenience. Anyways, have a good day! Roberth Martinez (talk) 22:26, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

@KGRAMR  Done -- ferret (talk) 00:14, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Ferret:Thank you so much for your aid and once again, sorry for the inconvenience! Roberth Martinez (talk) 00:16, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Skyrim 60 million sales figure

Hi! Was wondering is it ok if I update List of best-selling video game franchises and The Elder Scrolls with the 60 million Skyrim sales figure? Timur9008 (talk) 10:04, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Replied on talk page where this is being discussed. -- ferret (talk) 13:19, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

About Nintendo 3DS discontinuation dates

I linked to archives of the the Nintendo.com/3ds site that showed the last date that these system models were listed. The one for the New Nintendo 3DS XL, which is listed as "original research" is used on the system's main page, and the regular New Nintendo 3DS had a news article mentioning its discontinuation. I feel like a blanket deletion of my edits, when one date listed is a news article, and the other, despite being "original research" has been on the New Nintendo 3DS XL's article since 2019 doesn't make much sense. Wouldn't it make sense to remove the "original research" present in the New Nintendo 3DS article as well?

"New Nintendo 3DS production ends in Japan"] SpinelFan64 (talk) 02:12, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

@SpinelFan64 You're falling into a common trap. "But there was already something wrong" doesn't mean your edit, also wrong, should be allowed to stand. Nor, in reverting your WP:OR edit, am I required to analyze the entire article for other issues. The date of when Nintendo stopped selling a unit online, based on checking archived web sites, it's absolutely not valid. That at best means they ran out of stock at that point, with the actual discontinuation being earlier. Or, they simply stopped selling direct, while still shipping to other retailers. The point is, it's not a source for anything other than "Nintendo removed it from their online store" and even then its a bad call as it doesn't demonstrate whether it was moved to another link or temporarily removed, etc. -- ferret (talk) 02:31, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Would restoring the New Nintendo 3DS discontinuation date, which is sourced from multiple news articles, while leaving out the "original research", alongside removing the original research from the New Nintendo 3DS article's XL variant be an acceptable compromise? SpinelFan64 (talk) 02:39, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that source is appropriate for the New Nintendo 3DS discontinuation. The rest is not. -- ferret (talk) 14:11, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Sales of Monster Hunter World and its expansion

I wonder why this game isn't being added in list of best-selling games. Monster Hunter World and its expansion Monster Hunter World: Iceborne sold 29 million units combined [4] and I already added this topic on talk page of list of best-selling games but no one is replying sadly. Can you please explain, what is the problem with this game being added in list? Kazama16 (talk) 22:26, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

@Kazama16 Because it's combined. We don't know the exact sales of either game, and that's required for that list. At best, even if MHW and Iceborne sold 1 to 1, then the total sales of MHW is only 15 million, which doesn't make the list. -- ferret (talk) 22:29, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Though I guess we used a combined figure for Diablo 3. In which case my answer is: Just no one has gotten to it or was interested in handling the edit. -- ferret (talk) 22:30, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Letting you know

Hi. Just wanted to make sure you were looped in since KGRAMR tried to ping you. It appears there's yet another Eltomas2003 sockpuppet on the loose, now called Lennymcfee. They modified my DYK nom for Square to "be a bit more upbeat", and on my talk page when KGRAMR tried pinging you, they deleted the ping and a couple of other bits (here's the history record) You'll find the conversation in my talk archive with bits deleted by Lennymcfee restored. ProtoDrake (talk) 08:19, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

DUCK blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 10:55, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I actually read this from ProtoDrake's side before I read it on this side :) This is all so clear as day. We're working to try to get some more blocks in place. -- ferret (talk) 14:35, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Sales of original Tetris and Tetris (Gameboy)

I found this [5] it says that the original Tetris which was released in 1984 sold 125 million units and Gameboy version of Tetris sold 40 million units so can we rely on it? Kazama16 (talk) 14:41, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

@Kazama16 Please use the article's talk page. I'm just one person and not the final say. The 125 million number is not usable, it speaks to the franchise as a whole across every port and platform. The Gameboy figure might be usable though. Let's see what others say. -- ferret (talk) 16:39, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Gerblinpete and Meegvun

Both user appears to be operated by the same person and voted at afds (aiming for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shai Benbasat). Could you handle this. Thanks. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 00:16, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate and Drmies: would either of you be willing to check this one? It looks pretty ducky, but I'm unsure the master as I don't edit that topic area. -- ferret (talk) 01:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Well, I can tell you right now that they're on the same IP address, but I'm looking closer. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:08, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't see any older accounts. I left Meegvun partially blocked. There was someone else on the IP range who was trying to ignore ARBPIA, but I kind of doubt it was the same person. I guess if I were listening to death metal or something, they'd both be indeffed, but I was in a more relaxed mood and have been listening to Neu!'s "Super 16". I want that played whenever I enter a room. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:52, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Gladstonemofan

You might want to remove TPA. - FlightTime (open channel) 02:37, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@FlightTime Already did. -- ferret (talk) 02:38, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Just saw that, lol. Thanx, - FlightTime (open channel) 02:39, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Some WP:CIR problems with NatwonTSG2

I noticed that this user keeps resubmitting their draft article on the Rayman character despite being repeatedly declined as non-notable. So far I've had to decline it 3 times. I would just say "new editor" except this has been going on for a while and they've even put some insults on their own talk page of editors who have deleted their pages. It would be great if they could funnel the enthusiasm into something productive, but it seems like they are simply unable or unwilling to comprehend guidelines about notability, copyright, etc. despite being told over and over by different editors since last year. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't think there's anything I can do here, from an admin view. They aren't breaking any rule by continuing to try. And unlike some CIR editors, it's not a case of just resubmitting over and over without changes. From what I can see, after each decline, they put a fair amount of effort in trying to resolve it. You'll probably want to reach out to them directly. I also don't really see any insulting on their talk page. They're expressing frustration but not attacking anyone or calling any names. -- ferret (talk) 13:53, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Revdel Request

Hello, please delete three copyright revisions from the Chidiakhana article. Thank you! 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 18:34, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Please

Hello, could you help me improve this English in this article Kevin Peraza https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Peraza — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.219.223.137 (talk) 21:08, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Tragedy and Drama Games

How come Drama isn’t a Video Game genre? Hamster Gomez (talk) 21:30, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Your question is better asked at WT:VG. -- ferret (talk) 22:33, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Hamster Gomez (talk) 00:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

RE: Captain Price

yesterday i edited on captain price's page his first appearance in call of duty. I replaced "call of duty modern warfar 4" with call of duty two. This information is correct, it appears in the first or second mission where we play the English. look at the call of duty 2 wikipedia page and you will find this information. I can also bring you an in-game proof with a photo if you want it 90.18.62.225 (talk) 11:02, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

It is not correct. These are two separate characters with the same look and general appearance, but are not the same in-universe individual. The article is explicitly about the Modern Warfare incarnation. If they were the same character, John Price would be 80+ years old in Modern Warfare. -- ferret (talk) 12:56, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

It’s a little weird but ok 90.18.62.225 (talk) 13:28, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

To Ferret

I want to apologize, Ferret. I lost my cool when I shouldn't have. It's just very frustrating to be a lifelong fan of something and having some random person who doesn't know nearly as much try to change stuff. (There are still mistakes on the Kiesel Guitars Wikipedia page, which confirms my suspicion. The guitar in Michael Hermes' picture is a CT, not a Bolt). I remember being a kid and going to Guitar Center almost everything weekend seeing if there were new Carvin guitars in the store. Please accept my apology and perhaps I can give some advice on the page and leave it be. -John Johneastman76 (talk) 16:03, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Replied on their talk. -- ferret (talk) 16:12, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Ferret,

Since I'm blocked from making edits on the Kiesel Guitars page, which I understand due to poor behavior on my part, I have noticed a few discrepancies. I know you're committed to factual information on Wikipedia, so I just thought I would list some outdated info.

1. The L.C. Kiesel Company was founded in L.A., not San Diego. (https://www.kieselguitars.com/about)

2. The Jason Becker line no longer includes the JB100 and is replaced by the JBYY. (https://www.kieselguitars.com/series/guitar/jason-becker-yin-yang-series)

3. The Allan Holdsworth line has only one guitar (https://www.kieselguitars.com/series/guitar/allan-holdsworth-signature)

4. Frank Gambale has two signature models (https://www.kieselguitars.com/series/guitar/frank-gambale-signature) and (https://www.kieselguitars.com/series/guitar/frank-gambale-signature-2)

5. Greg Howe is a collaborator on the Lyra and has a signature spec package (https://www.kieselguitars.com/series/guitar/lyra)

5. Lee McKinney now has a headless model, not the LPM based on the DC (https://www.kieselguitars.com/series/guitar/lee-mckinney-signature)

6. There are way more signature artists (https://www.kieselguitars.com/artists)

Like I previously said, I have followed Carvin religiously since I has about 6 in the 80s and am I massive fan. Johneastman76 (talk) 18:35, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Notice how these are all primary source (the manufacturer themselves). This isn't suitable sourcing on Wikipedia. We are not a catalog. I've made a few minor tweaks to verb tense and such, but it's not the goal of Wikipedia to keep an up-to-date catalog of their products. We need a third party source for any models to be mentioned. To be honest, anything not being covered by a reliable secondary source (WP:SECONDARY) should probably be removed. -- ferret (talk) 19:17, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Gravity Falls

I have a question about Gravity Falls and why is not the horror genre. Do you know where I can ask it? Hamster Gomez (talk) 11:41, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

On the talk page of the article. -- ferret (talk) 15:07, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Hamster Gomez (talk) 21:10, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

quick links

mind if i copy the second half of your quick links to my page? Michael H (talk) 23:02, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Reverting change for Tetris page

Hello, Ferret! Thank for reverting my change. Now the page is slightly harder to read. Did you consider my revision? Shaynes75 (talk) 19:29, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

@Shaynes75 We should never put random br HTML tags in an article. Did you consider that whatever you were trying to solve for you did not help, or made it worse, for readers at other resolutions and device formats? -- ferret (talk) 21:02, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

It solved the problem on all my devices. What do you want me to do? 2600:1700:6EF0:DB00:88EF:620A:5B69:9261 (talk) 22:04, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

@Shaynes75 Not insert br HTML tags. Because you are not everyone, and arbitrary line breaks are not the solution to whatever issue you believe there is. They cause large gaps and whitespace for other readers. -- ferret (talk) 23:57, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

It wasn't a belief it was demonstrable error in how the page was rendered. However, if this how how Wikipedia management treats a donor then I won't be donating my money to Wikipedia anymore. Since you started whining about my improvement, my account is inaccessible, thus I am unable to donate. Good job!

At no point have you offered a better solution, just complained because I didn't edit the page in a way approved by you, someone whose resistance of which I was unaware until today. 2600:1700:6EF0:DB00:CDAA:4917:6B71:8F11 (talk) 03:26, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Are you really that unfamiliar with the concept of pages looking differently in different devices? It's a pretty common thing. Your change may have helped how it looked on your device, but it didn't help on others. Ferrets comments were correct, and if you're going to throw a tantrum over an admin calmly telling you not to do something as simple not adding extra spaces, then editing Wikipedia is probably not going to be your thing. Sergecross73 msg me 12:58, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Ferrets comments were both rude and unhelpful. He didn't show a enter way to correct the problem. When I added the dreaded BR tag the text rendered correctly on my iPhone, iPad, Windows tablet and desktop.

I've been editing Wikipedia pages for year never had this much resistance. I don't care if,som alleged extra white space hurt his feelings, my minor edit made the page easier to read. Shaynes75 (talk) 16:38, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Ferret was simply straight to the point. And correct no less. And no one's buying the rest of what you're saying. Experienced editors who know what they're doing would never say "Well since you didn't let me add extra white space to an article I'm no longer donating money to Wikipedia." That's one of the oldest tricks in the book. Please just stop. Sergecross73 msg me 17:04, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Also, I'm a volunteer, I have no knowledge of whether you've donated or not, nor would the fact you've donated grant you any special status to make problematic edits. Nothing has been done to limit access to your account, either. -- ferret (talk) 13:05, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Need help with a page move

Sorry to bother you with this, but I'm trying to move List of Yakuza characters to Characters of the Yakuza series for more proper titling per similar articles, however the target is already a redirect with two bot edits. Would you be able to help?-- Kung Fu Man (talk) 17:17, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done -- ferret (talk) 18:25, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Joy Mech Fight

Games like Mother are listed as VC-only, so what's the issue with listing Joy Mech Fight as NSO-only? --Meester Tweester (talk) 22:50, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Meester Tweester Then that's wrong. The column in the table is for release dates. Putting a non-date doesn't help anyone with the purpose of the table. -- ferret (talk) 23:27, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

If you don't like it, shouldn't all the "VC-only" be changed to dates then? --Meester Tweester (talk) 14:27, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@Meester Tweester They should be, but the burden doesn't lie with me to fix it just because I noticed a different issue being added. Feel free to work on it. If I have time I may as well. -- ferret (talk) 14:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Can’t find one suitable/specific one, so here you go! Really needed a wake-up call from all the mistakes I made this month. By the way, what happened during that Todd Howard wikiraid? Brachy08 (Talk) 06:25, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

@Brachy0008 This NYMAG articles covers it. -- ferret (talk) 13:28, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Defold Engine listing removed, why?

You state that it needs a page and something about being accepted at AfC. Being new, I don't know what AfC is, can you clarify? You also stated it's not "notable", when the reality is, there are numerous engines on this list that no longer or barely exist, and were never particularly relevant. However, Defold, that is actually a current and useful offering with an over 16 year history, isn't present. A new user searching for game engines on google or duckduckgo, where Wikipedia's "List of Game Engines" comes up at or near the top, can spin wheels finding nothing but irrelevant and/or useless engines, even historically, but can't find Defold Engine that is actually available, F.O.S.S., actively developed, was used in the past and present for commercial games, and has a relatively important historical context. 206.195.155.42 (talk) 14:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Notable refers to our policy, WP:N. There is an on-going effort at Draft talk:Defold to establish the notability of the topic and bring it to a level that is appropriate for Wikipedia inclusion. WP:AFC - AFC is Articles for Creation, a process used to evaluate and accept drafts at Wikipedia. This particular list, due to the enormous number of game engines that exists, some little more than fan projects, some huge corporate backed products, has a list criteria that all entries must be Notable by Wikipedia policy standards. Defold currently is not, but with a little more work, may be accepted soon. -- ferret (talk) 14:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for the information. Technically the engine is mentioned in King listing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defold There are other engines in the list that simply link to the page for the company or article where the engine is mentioned, not to a page for the engine itself, would that be an acceptable change? For example, the Enigma engine links to Nival(company), there are others of this type as well. Exult links to the Ultima VII game, the only game it was used for AFAIK, HPL Engine links to Frictional Games, etc... 206.195.155.42 (talk) 15:32, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Sometimes entries on the list become stall or need re-review. As far as Defold goes, the current situation of the draft and the conflict of interest issues surrounding it, I would strongly recommend doing nothing at this time. The question should be settled within a week or so. -- ferret (talk) 15:34, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thank you, my concern, as someone who is a retired teacher of computer programming and math, is that young people are interested in programming and game development, search google, go to Wikipedia, and are inundated with proprietary listings, as well as many irrelevant or obsolete ones. However, a relevant listing (Defold), doesn't exist...while many similar and also relevant engines (Godot, Gdevelop, Love2D), do have a listing. FYI, I have no affiliation with the Defold Foundation. I just stumbled on the issue doing my own research. 206.195.155.42 (talk) 15:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

The notability policy does not always agree with our own views on importance, including my own. Right now, the Defold topic is enveloped in a bit of controversy after the Defold team offered compensation for people to try to create the article despite numerous past rejections on policy grounds. That was very much against our policies, but has been somewhat resolved. I've been working with those editors this week to try to prove the case. We're close, but with everything around it, we need a clear picture before anything happens on this list. -- ferret (talk) 15:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I couldn't really decipher what makes something "notable" from the link you posted, other than maybe, "there are a lot of articles it's linked to/in", which means it's only worthy if it gets picked up by press or maybe academia a lot, which seems heavily biased. Something can be talked about a lot, and not be relevant to what someone might be intending when searching for game engines; to use, study, modify, recreate, etc. Yet an engine could be less talked about, significantly, but be far more useful to that list...which is really misleading people for a search result so prominent IMO. I'd say this goes beyond Defold, as I can list a few more that would be more relevant to use or study, that also aren't on the list, Urho3D and Bevy(written in Rust), being just two. They aren't talked about much yet, outside of programming circles, but they are far more relevant to someone looking for an engine to study or use. Anyway, I understand the hesitancy with the Defold thing, given the background. Hopefully it works itself out. I won't bug you again. 206.195.155.42 (talk) 19:46, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm well aware of these arguments and even agree with some of them, but the best I can offer right now is to be clear: I don't decide the policies/guidelines on my own. They have been crafted by the community over the course of 20 years with the input of hundreds of editors. Sometimes they've loosened, sometimes they've tightened. The particular specific guideline that game engines fall under is WP:NPRODUCT, which requires that you're able to demonstrate sustained coverage of the product over time. We're working to establish that for Defold, and it's close. I cannot comment on the others, as I've not researched them myself. -- ferret (talk) 20:58, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Undid revision 1176949354 by Ed-ochensocial to the Defold article

Hello @Ferret. Thanks for your comments. You provided the following reason: "The earlier clarification regarded the open source license issue in 2020. This one is asking about "suspicions" for King announcing the engine was free to use in 2016. This remains unclarified". But previously I also added the following clarification: "Some mobile developers have expressed concern about King's true motives as intentions of King with Defold engine weren't fully known and no business goal was clearly expressed in the announcement". Is this not suitable or is it not enough? Ed-ochensocial (talk) 00:55, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ed-ochensocial I did miss that. I've trimmed the whole thing, as the language was a bit excessively negative. -- ferret (talk) 01:48, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Ed-ochensocial (talk) 02:02, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Block evasion?

Hi, my edit under WP:DENY to undo some stuff added by an editor who you blocked earlier this month, was just un-done by a brand new account [6]. You might want to check it out. The edit summary looks a lot like this one by the blocked editor when they were reverted before. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:36, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Bri: CU Confirmed. -- ferret (talk) 16:40, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Edit Revert to the Fallout Franchise

Hey, thanks for letting me know the header wasn't the right place for this...

It should be noted that Fallout's fictional timeline diverges from real life in ways that non-players may not expect of the game's genre and aesthetic, i.e. the "Great War of 2077" - the final nuclear exchange depicted in the series - was between an American Commonwealth of 13 regions and a People's Republic of China that never experienced the Great Reform, rather than a Cold War-style communist Soviet Union or a more modern Capitalist-influenced PRC.

Sorry for the inconvenience, is there a suitable place in Fallout for placing that info? Or, if I'm reading it right, that info is already included and I didn't notice it? Gadg8eer (talk) 01:14, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

@Gadg8eer Fallout_(series)#Series_overview. The setting section covers it in detail, including the 13 Commonwealth part of the US and that the Great War was with China. -- ferret (talk) 01:27, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Ah, thanks! My apologies for having not seen it. Gadg8eer (talk) 18:37, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

		The Video Game Barnstar
		Thanks for reverting my edits!! i never knew it was referring the dev software, and thought it was a typo. thanks a hell of a lot!! :) Babysharkboss2 was here!! 13:31, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Microsoft Gaming

I can’t help but notice you changed my edit. You misunderstood it. I changed the XGS page to Microsoft Gaming because XGS exists under this new division under the Subsidiaries & Divisions page. Maybe I shouldn’t have added the 2019-2023 part? KAISEAN W. (talk) 17:15, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

@KAISEAN W. This page is for Xbox Game Studios. It cannot simply be renamed, because it is first and foremost about XGS. Microsoft Gaming is a brand new division that does not yet have it's own page, which would be at Microsoft Gaming. XGS has not been renamed or changed and continues to operate as it has. -- ferret (talk) 17:17, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Boooooooooo. KAISEAN W. (talk) 17:21, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

The Elder SCrolls VI

Hi, I see you have edited the page The Elder Scrolls VI. I only recently noticed the article was added, while a draft appears. While reading it over, I saw that some phrasing seemed to be a copy paste. Is there any policy against that? Ebbedlila (talk) 12:33, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Ebbedlila The person who copied the draft to the article was the person who authored the draft. This happens all the time. Attribution was noted in the edit summary of Special:Diff/1177226780 which resolves any issues. -- ferret (talk) 13:07, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Discord article

Hello, I edited the Discord article after you reverted changes and this time I added some sources from reliable news sites rather than using changelogs as sources. Let me know if it looks okay now. Thehotwheelsguy99 (talk) 20:47, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Might want to revoke talk page access for 84.202.199.205

If that's something that can be done for IPs? Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 20:28, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes. -- ferret (talk) 21:11, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Potential block evasion

I noticed you were the blocking admin of Grandmaster Huon. There is a possibility that the user it attempting evade their block. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smokescreen (Transformers) (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion#AfD request for Smokescreen (Transformers) (2nd nomination).4meter4 (talk) 21:43, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@4meter4 I've taken a look and at this time don't see a connection between the two editors. -- ferret (talk) 21:57, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

The accusation, in my opinion, was baseless and done in bad faith. That's not how we operate on Wikipedia. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@InfiniteNexus It's not unreasonable to be suspicious of another AFD here, but it probably should have just been a question to me, rather than accusation in multiple places. Either way, I've left replies at everywhere I'm aware of. -- ferret (talk) 22:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

It should have been a quiet investigation with you or another CU behind the scenes, not a flagrant accusation on the AfD page. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

In my defense, I was not the one who made the initial connection or made the first public comment. I saw the comment made by DrowssapSMM at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smokescreen (Transformers) (2nd nomination), looked at the first AFD, and then looked at the block of Grandmaster Huon and the editing history of the anon IP. Altogether, DrowssapSMM made a fairly convincing case. In looking at the anon IPs editing history I found the request at Talk:AFD and assumed the first thing to do would be to notify the editor who posted the AFD on behalf of the anon IP that an issue had been raised with the nom. I then realized after that the blocking admin should be notified, and came here. All of this to say, the only reason there were so many messages is that I didn't think to come here until later. It's not like this kind of situation crops up normally as a non-admin, and I don't see how a private conversation could happen when there were valid procedural concerns in a public AFD. I feel like InfiniteNexus is acting in WP:BADFAITH by attacking editors trying to do the right thing in an unusual situation.4meter4 (talk) 22:25, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

It seems you're misunderstanding AGF. AGF means that you don't assume without good reason that someone is acting with malicious intent. By your own admission, you looked at the IP's two-edit contributions log and immediately concluded that they were likely the blocked user trying to evade their block and undermine consensus. That didn't sit well with me, so I wrote that it was not appropriate to make accusations without evidence. Never have I suggested that your actions were done with malice. In any case, this is just a minor incident that I have no intention of dragging on further, so I am going to WP:LETITGO now. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@InfiniteNexus @4meter4, I've address the issue as much as I plan to do, so this should probably continue somewhere else such as either of your talk pages. -- ferret (talk) 23:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

As stated, I am just going to WP:LETITGO now and move on to more productive tasks. (Apologies for the many talk page alerts, I know how annoying that can be.) InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

User:JasonR.

User:JasonR. is emailing users, is it possible to send emails to targeted users (everyone?) warning about this?

• Special:Contributions/JasonR......User talk:JasonR.

.... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 16:01, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

I do not believe so. Either way they cannot email any further. -- ferret (talk) 16:17, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, potential blocking evasion

Hi. I saw to to you blocked User:104.247.242.154 and User:69.165.128.0/18, well seems to that user/s is/are back as User:108.175.235.192. The same behaviour and pages to edit etc. Sorry for taking your time. Nubia86 (talk) 06:09, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

@Nubia86 Yep, looks like it. Blocked again. -- ferret (talk) 13:57, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Potential sockpupptry?

I do not know for certain whether I am right or not, I came across this quite accidentally, but I noticed User:John B123 and User:Johnf69 have made some very similar edits to Kang and Marvel-related articles in the past, and with both of their usernames having John in it, I was wondering if they might be the same user? 64.43.50.149 (talk) 15:32, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

You're going to have to present a lot more evidence than "John in the username, edited Marvel". It looks pretty obvious they aren't the same editor, with one having vastly more broad topic interests. -- ferret (talk) 15:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Because you deserve it...

	HERE'S A KUVASZ!
	"Which is cool!" IfTrueEqualsFalse (talk) 20:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Question

I suspect a user you blocked for "abusively used multiple accounts" might be back with a new one based on what they are editing. Where is the best place to report this? Esw01407 (talk) 00:05, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

WP:SPI or just tell me the names. -- ferret (talk) 00:24, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Nevermind I see it. Looking. -- ferret (talk) 00:26, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Confirmed, blocked. -- ferret (talk) 00:36, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the help. Esw01407 (talk) 00:49, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

User editing while logged out

Hi Ferret. I strongly believe the user Dolirama has been editing while logged out on the range 2601:806:8300:D0D0:B185:F07A:DAAF:FBE5/32. They have resumed editing on their registered account after I informed the IP on their talk page that this can be considered sockpuppetry. Dolirama has just said they've been "moving" and busy and it couldn't possibly have been them. There is substantial overlap. The IP has edited two obscure compilation albums by LeAnn Rimes that Dolirama created (which they reverted me on using the IP here), has taken issue with things that Dolirama has (the presence of parameters in citation templates and apostrophes per MOS:POSS), editing Taylor Swift song articles, as well as another article Dolirama created here. I find this too substantial to be coincidence. I pinged Serge to see if he could convince them not to edit logged out, but they've steadfastly denied it's them. Letting you know as you could confirm it. Not saying it's blockable, but it could be confirmed, which would be a compelling reason for them to not edit logged out again. Thanks for anything you can do. Ss112 01:52, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ss112 What are you asking me to do? I cannot confirm any IP to an account for you as a checkuser, it's against policy. You warned at 23:04, 16 November 2023, and the IP stopped editing and has not resumed. -- ferret (talk) 01:56, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

The IP hasn't resumed editing thus far, but even if they do, Dolirama has steadfastly denied it's them because they are "moving" and "busy". So if I notice that the IP editor resumes editing and inform you, would you be able to confirm on your own it is and block them for sockpuppetry since they've been informed that's wrong? Ss112 01:59, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

I could make a behavioral determination and block. I can never confirm that an IP is an account. -- ferret (talk) 02:03, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

I know that CheckUsers cannot confirm to regular users that a registered user is editing from an IP address for privacy reasons. That is not what I was asking you to do, and I have never asked you nor any other CU to explicitly tell me an IP and user are the same. To clarify: Are you saying that if I present you with evidence now, or only if the IP editor resumes editing, that you can block them for sockpuppetry? Asking because there's substantial behavioural evidence already. Ss112 02:08, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

"confirm" pretty much means CU :) If you ask me to confirm something, that's how I'll take it. If the user refuses to stay logged in, I'll evaluate the situation then. -- ferret (talk) 02:11, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Will let you know if I see the IP resume editing. Ss112 02:13, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

For future reference though so I don't have to type it out if the time comes, thus far the overlap is:

• Editing obscure compilation albums by LeAnn Rimes that Dolirama recently created. The IP reverted me over the inclusion of parameters on one here
• Dolirama has taken issue with the same things that the IP editor has; for example, restoring the same parameters that the IP did in the link above but on a Cher song article here. The IP has extensively contributed to that same Cher song article: see its history.
• Both the IP editor and Dolirama have extensively contributed to Taylor Swift song articles: Dolirama uploaded a sample to Lavender Haze here, and the IP edited it extensively on this.
• Dolirama created the article Kenneth Handler, which the IP edited on the same day and extensively on this.
• IP adds onto LeAnn Rimes articles about articles that Dolirama recently created. Dolirama created These Arms of Mine (LeAnn Rimes song), and the IP several days later adds prose about it to its parent album article.

Fair enough, it's possible that the IP editor had an existing interest in LeAnn Rimes and noticed that Dolirama created those articles recently, but the topic overlap, both taking issue with the same parameters and possessive apostrophe placement, the IP not editing while I was talking to Dolirama, and both editing Kenneth Handler's article (of all things to edit on this website) both logged in and out to me confirms they have at least used that range. What this looks like to me is Dolirama barely bothers to log in to edit.

The thing is I wouldn't have even noticed any of this if the IP had not reverted me on that LeAnn Rimes article earlier. Dolirama has said they are busy IRL and moving, seemingly as an excuse because I pinged Sergecross73 and they thought if they didn't defend themselves they would be instantly blocked or something. It would have just been simpler for them if they were like "yes, I was editing from an IP, I'll try not to do that now". Instead they came up with this fairly poor excuse and accused me of "bad faith accusations" because my feelings were apparently "hurt" over a revert. Uncovering all of that topic-editing overlap...that's no bad faith accusation to me, that looks like proof. Ss112 02:32, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

To let you know, they've resumed editing on the IP: [7]. Dolirama blanked their talk page and said "Email to account has been removed and will be logging out", then five minutes later used the IP to blank their talk page and personally attack me with "??? CREEPY! What's this nutjob talking about?" I guess that's as good an admission as any, as they did indeed log out lol. Personal attacks now are just par for the course at this point too I guess. Ss112 04:13, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

No it's not, you're making assumptions, yet again. Dude, do you really have nothing better to do then be salty about some random IP address reverting your edit and making false accusations? Comes off very bullyish. You go and accuse me of lying about work and moving and I showed my friends all this and even they agree you have no evidence and are just enjoying trouble. Leave me alone. Dolirama (talk) 04:30, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Dude, I only heard about your account for the first time today. Also, I didn't say anything about "work". Ss112 04:40, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Oh I'd also like to add that my friends say that it appears to be stalking behavior as you're keeping an eye on all these IP address trying to prove they are me and I tend to agree with them. Go find something better to do with your time. Dolirama (talk) 04:32, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Are these friends in the room with us right now? Lmao. "Keeping an eye on" you when I only heard of your account today? OK, lol. Ss112 04:40, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Yep this just proves I am correct, you are falsely accusing me of a sock puppet to get me blocked as you go to YET ANOTHER ADMIN, good thing I'm abandoning my account. This is very bullying behavior you are making assumptions that IP address are me and also saying that I am lying about being at work and moving, which you cannot prove and then you had this admin come and gang up on me. First and foremost, the one on Kenneth Handler, that was actually a fault on Wikipedia, I remember that edit, I was working on the page while logged in and then when I had saved the edit I noticed I was logged out and that was unintentional and I logged directly back in. As for the rest, I cannot tell you. Neither of you have the right to go around saying what I am and am not doing or call me a liar either and then have people gang up on me, you also don't have the right to accuse me of lying. I have removed the conversation from my talk page as it is nothing but false accusations from both you and I will not stand by and put up with it. You can both falsely accuse me all you want, go right ahead, you're both are wrong and ganging up on a single person. I do not want to discuss this any further and ask that you both stop falsely accusing me of something I'm not. That's not very mature. Thank you for lying on me and falsely accusing me. I both hope you get the day you deserve and will learn in future not to go falsely accusing someone of something they aren't doing just cause you're upset that your edits were reverted by some random IP address. Good day. That does not give you the right to go and drag another user into it. The account is now abandon so why don't you both move on and stop ganging up on people. I showed all this to a few friends of mine and they all laughed at this. They said it's very sad that someone would go to this length over their edits being reverted to go and try and get two admin involved and call someone a liar just to get their way on the edits they made cause here's the question, "Where's the proof that in the past 11 days I haven't been at work or busy moving? You have none so to not give the benefit of the doubt and go to these extremes is very telling of the toxicity of this site. I hope it gets shut down some day so no one else has to deal with this. Dolirama (talk) 04:26, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

"Abandoning" your account lasted for all of half an hour, so looks like we can't trust anything you say. Oh we have the "I showed this to all my friends!" line multiple times. A classic. Oh no, I guess I should give up pointing out an editor who claims they're so busy they couldn't possibly have edited while logged out clearly did indeed edit while logged out. Funny that the "unintentional" IP edit happened on the exact same IP range that you claim you're no longer editing from, yet edited from five minutes after "abandoning" your account and writing in the edit summary that you had indeed "logged out". "Neither of you have the right to go around saying what I am" but then "You can both falsely accuse me all you want, go right ahead". Which is it? Also, please stop saying these things about what you've apparently been doing with your time over the last 11 days as if they're empirical facts that we know and we should take you at your word on when there is compelling evidence against you.

You literally could have just admitted you edited while logged out and said you wouldn't do it again, which an admin would understand and move on with as long as you did indeed not edit logged out again, but because you thought you were going to be blocked if you didn't defend yourself, it's become "your feelings are hurt, I've been busy, stop falsely accusing me, you have nothing better to do with your time and my friends, my family and my dog all came into my room, gathered around the computer and laughed at you!" You've made it more complex than it ever needed to be and made yourself look worse. Either abandon your account for real or stop saying you are. Ss112 04:40, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

The ip range is hard blocked so that should be that. -- ferret (talk) 04:52, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I'm one of the friends that was mentioned in the above and I gotta say, it's nice to see you both enjoy bullying someone who's got mental health issues and calling them a liar. I see here we have an unjustified block of an IP address that's been falsely accused of being my friend and all I got to say is, do you all feel powerful? I'm sorry but my friend has been working and moving, he was not lying and has been sending me screenshots of what has been said and I find it disgusting that you guys have nothing better to do than to gang up him. As of the ""Abandoning" your account lasted for all of half an hour", he was still getting emails and so he found out how to remove his email from his account and logged in to did so. He's not been editing while logged out, he's been working and moving and he has every right to do so. So why don't you both apologize to him for being wrong? 2A0C:8A41:2100:0:0:0:9078:E7D6 (talk) 05:03, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Come on, stop wasting your own time. You write all your messages on your account and IPs exactly the same way. Do you think we don't know how to check for proxies and VPN? We've seen all this a million times before. -- ferret (talk) 05:08, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Oh dear, this is a worse case than I imagined. They know how to use a proxy and worst of all are continuing with this "friend" facade... who next, their mother? Sorry for unleashing this one-man show on you, Ferret... Ss112 05:10, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Another proxy... Ferret, at this point shouldn't Dolirama be blocked too? To allow them to return to editing after this pitiable revolving cast-via-proxy... Ss112 05:20, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Rollback for stjn

Hey, I would like to have rollback permissions in English Wikipedia to make it easier to revert vandalism-only edits. I already have those perms on Wikidata and in Russian Wikipedia. stjn 20:55, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

 Done @Stjn -- ferret (talk) 20:56, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Thea

Sure glad you are taking care of this. Can we revdel the smartvoter.com assertion? Best -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:44, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

@Deepfriedokra Sorry I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. Assertion by whom in what regard? -- ferret (talk) 16:11, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

This one here -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:23, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

@Deepfriedokra Oh, no, no need for Revdel. Those sources are about the BLP and make no claims or statements or references to Thea. Thea has already confirmed herself as a supporter/advocate of Hatami, so Snowcactus0 is really just bludgeoning. They're getting a block if they do it again. -- ferret (talk) 16:25, 23 November 2023 (UTC).

Revert on Princess Daisy

I'm not sure what makes the added source unreliable. Can you explain? Also, aside from what I mentioned with the source I removed being filled with numerous errors and broken links, the way it is written now on this article implies the original ranked the characters on scales in general or in regards to one another, when it was specifically on a scale of how worth rescuing by Mario they are. On top of the errors including misreferring to Daisy as "Smash Bros.' Daisy", including her imagery under Pauline's section, and centering around asking people to vote in a format without the intended voting system, is that not a good reason to disinclude such an article? Otherwise, that other quote was erroneous because Daisy doesn't even have brown hair, it is officially referred to by Nintendo as orange and in my personal opinion is plainly a redhead. TimonLeslieBerkowitz (talk) 02:00, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

U Thant edits and ban evasion

If you don't mind, who's the banned editor active at U Thant, among other articles, currently? I didn't see anything immediately in the edit history, —C.Fred (talk) 00:09, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

@C.Fred SwissArmyGuy. His home IPv6 ranges are blocked so he's been on proxies lately. He has a habit of pinging me, either on edits or to user talk pages where he's trying to get proxy edits (or Meta to ban me and Ponyo). -- ferret (talk) 00:12, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Apology

I'm guessing you probably saw it, but I do owe you an apology. Whether or not you are on the spectrum, that wasn't something to throw around out of emotion. I knew better, and I'm sorry. TlonicChronic (talk) 23:42, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@TlonicChronic Appreciated. I left a comment on your talk with some general advice. -- ferret (talk) 23:46, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

That's advice I will follow. I believe I also owe the person I needlessly dragged into the matter an apology, but I worry that would do more harm than good. TlonicChronic (talk) 23:56, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@TlonicChronic She's blanked the section so I would let the matter lie. -- ferret (talk) 23:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for moderating. I would ask you take a glance at my edit to the conflict resolution at some point, if it isn't too big an inconvenience. If you don't agree, I would value you're input. Either way, I wish you a pleasant night. TlonicChronic (talk) 00:33, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@TlonicChronic My current advice would be to just walk away. Drmies did not revert your last edit. You've essentially already "won", but continue to beat the horse. -- ferret (talk) 00:36, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

It's less about winning and more about consesus. If people actually think the wording is wrong, I want a better one. TlonicChronic (talk) 00:56, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

And merry christmas, for what it's worth. TlonicChronic (talk) 23:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Apology

You owe me an apology. TlonicChronic (talk) 15:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

No, I don't. You're going on talk pages casting aspirations at me, and trying to make clever insults about weasels on article talks. -- ferret (talk) 15:39, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Rather than acknowledged you made a mistake and falsely accused me of starting a war, you doubled down, told me I'd come to a bad end, and held your self up as an authority not to be questioned. You definitely owe me an apology. TlonicChronic (talk) 15:41, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@TlonicChronic If you find my interactions have been improper as an administrator, you're welcome to head to WP:ANI. In the meantime, I request you stay off my talk page. -- ferret (talk) 15:42, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

(I was accusing you of using weasel words) TlonicChronic (talk) 15:42, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

How

How do you do it, you know provide URL I just don't know how though. -- BeerusOver9000 (talk) 11:20, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

@BeerusOver9000: Help:Citing -- ferret (talk) 19:36, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Revert on Source 2

Hi. I'm new. Why did you revert my change? I thought it would look better to have the updated logo. Moxiephobia (talk) 21:02, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

It's a lower quality image with an improper license on Commons, at risk of deletion. -- ferret (talk) 21:04, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Moxiephobia (talk) 21:06, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Holidays

~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~

Hello Ferret: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Spread the love; use {{subst:User:Dustfreeworld/Xmas1}} to send this message.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Happy New Year!

Wishing you the best in 2024, on Wikipedia and off. See you around the project. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 18:00, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year 2024!

Happy New Year!

Hello Ferret: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a great New Year! Cheers, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:31, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:31, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

A question

Hey Ferret, you talked with me some days ago about my "trying to help talk pages" crazy spree, I slowed down to just correct grammar mistakes and including more links to relevant words in the articles, without changing the contact. I was wondering. how did you get to it when editing? like the first time you add a reference to a page or your first article? Can you help me understand all of this a bit better. Thanks a lot! —Nanami73 ^talk 21:39, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

@Nanami-seven-three I'm really old now :P I don't exactly remember how I got started. I edited as an IP for a bit and eventually made an account. I was paying attention to articles for video games I was currently or had played, and while I still mostly stomp around the video game area, branched out from there. In short though, I read a lot of Wikipedia, and occasionally I'd read a typo or grammar issue, or realize a detail was missing, or that something was vandalism. I'd fix it, and eventually just became more and more embedded in doing so. -- ferret (talk) 21:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

My first registered edit, Special:Diff/251768085, I think I had googled up her name in relation to a TV show, happened to see the vandalism, and reverted it. -- ferret (talk) 21:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

I see, I didn't expect vandalism just putting "not" on specific statements. I still didn't came across vandalism. Do you think looking at recent edits could be a good starting point? Or perhaps I should focus more on just checking if any articles need change? Again, thanks for helping! —Nanami73 ^talk 21:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

@Nanami-seven-three My personal method is via watchlist. I watch topics that I'm interested in, and when they have edits I review them. I have my watch list set to the following filters: Unseen changes, Page edits, Page creations, Wikidata edits, Logged actions, Account creations, May Have problems, LIkely have problems, Very likely have problems. The last three add color coding when the system believes the edit might be problematic. It's not sure fire. Sometimes it's innocent. But it helps say "This one you should really take a look at." These same filters work on Recent Changes. "Unseen changes" is important so that I'm not constantly reviewing the same things. -- ferret (talk) 22:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for answering! I think things are starting to become more clear. Again thanks a lot! —Nanami73 ^talk 22:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Update on Video Game Console

hey, noticed you reverted a change I made a while back and I've added a citation. Could you check if I did the right thing :P Dexterryyyy (talk) 18:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Dexterryyyy Try not to mix together disparate edits all at once. For example, you made three changes here: You changed the gallery images, updated the PS5 sales, and updated the Xbox sales. The gallery update wasn't an improvement as you switched to lower quality images. I've reverted that. The Xbox sales used an unreliable source, Statistica. That site is known to use figures from unreliable sources and Wikipedia itself, so its no good. The PS5 update is fine though, Polygon is an RS. I moved the source to the proper place. -- ferret (talk) 18:21, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Noted, appreciate the reply and info. I don't even recollect changing anything in gallery, must've been some type of accident? Thanks again for the help :D Dexterryyyy (talk) 18:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Dexterryyyy If you edited an old version, you may have reverted someone else's changes in regards to the gallery. Probably what happened is clicked my revert, edited that diff from a couple weeks ago, and accidently undid all other edits since then. I've done it myself plenty of times. -- ferret (talk) 18:42, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

oh that might explain it as I actually did update my own previous edit. Seems it's much practicable to start afresh and edit the latest revision. Dexterryyyy (talk) 22:08, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Wishes

Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 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.

Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:47, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Ghost band timeline

Hi, I saw you reverted my edit on Ghost (Swedish band). Other bands I reviewed did not have any inline sourcing whatsoever in their timeline sections. What would be the most appropriate place to add all of the sourcing? Can we restore the timelines while I round up detailed citations? If there's no specific challenge to any of the information I've added, is it fair to let it stand for now if I get it all sourced up in the next day or two? Paradoxsociety 05:14, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Paradoxsociety Most articles have inline citations somewhere within the body that cover the members of the band. But the fact that some articles might fail WP:V doesn't really mean it should be added to other articles. The problem is that almost the entire table you added mentioned individuals not covered or sourced in the prose at all. As these are essentially WP:BLP claims (Statements about living individuals, including non-notable ones), omitting the sourcing is not an option. Work on it in your sandbox first. -- ferret (talk) 05:42, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough! Apologies for the oversight on WP:BLP. I think for the two most recent members, it might be next to impossible to find truly solid sources for. I suppose what might make sense then is to list all the other names (sourced) in the prose EXCEPT for those two but then list them in the timeline under their "stage" names only. So we can have mostly-complete information here but still respect the BLP rules. Paradoxsociety 05:53, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

RevisionDelete

I'm very sorry. Could you delete https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1191758136 , and https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1191758070 .

Accidentally logged out. 16:19, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

 Done -- ferret (talk) 16:24, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Baldur's Gate reversion

So basically what I'm hearing from you is: please, let's be boring and safe and stale. Please, help me understand what your concern is here. Vranak (talk) 23:20, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't really see much to say other than, yeah, let's be boring and safe and stale. We're an encyclopedia, sorry. Writing riveting second person plot descriptions is not what we should be doing. -- ferret (talk) 23:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Vranak Kindly do not lie in your edit summaries. I replied to you immediately. If you don't like my response, try the article's talk page or WT:VG for more opinions. -- ferret (talk) 14:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hmm I'm not exactly sure what happened, but I genuinely believed that 24 hours had transpired and you hadn't answered me. I have no idea how that could have happened. Anyway I'm glad we're on the same page now, at least in terms of recognizing the importance of communication. If I care enough about this issue at a later date I'll read your reply and perhaps have more to say. However I do apologize because I must have made some kind of blunder or mistake or miscalculation at some point. Take care. Vranak (talk) 16:28, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Vranak No problem. Things get missed, but having it in an edit summary forever got to me. I do recommend the article talk page or the project talk page if you want to broach the subject again in the future, for a wider audience. -- ferret (talk) 16:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Understood, that's a good idea. Sorry for bringing disrepute to your name so carelessly. I'll just drop this matter entirely, at least until Jan. 1st 2025.... unless I can completely rework my text to something that agrees with you. I won't try to restore that particular slant again. Vranak (talk) 02:32, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

User:SuperMarioA9H5

Their unblock request seems reasonable, and looking over their edit history I see someone who is genuinely trying to contribute productively. Yes, they were warned more than once, but still, I think that's a rather long block for a first block for something like this, and perhaps if they were counseled to add the citation when they add the information it supports things would go better in the future. Daniel Case (talk) 10:12, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@Daniel Case Hi Daniel, I'm generally open to any admin using their judgement with an unblock appeal of mine. Honestly I almost indef'd them, as they had considerable guidance on this before. If you feel their appeal shows that the issue won't continue, feel free. -- ferret (talk) 14:02, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about USERG

Now i know about the user generated content is not allowed, great i wasted even more time for my edit just being reverted on the modded minecraft page haha! Anyways ill continue to improve with what i can in future taking all those variables into account.

-> Wikipedia:Reliable sources#User-generated content Luigi Cotocea (talk) 19:07, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@Luigi Cotocea I recommend taking a look at WP:VG/S, which has a list of sources that have been vetted for reliability in relation to video games. It also has a custom Google search that can help you find suitable sources. -- ferret (talk) 19:27, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Video Game Settings

Then you'll need to create a linked page of development locations and settings for video games. can you put all these dev & setting links, that you deleted from the old video games list of lists, there?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lists_of_video_games&diff=1193268165&oldid=1193268053&variant=en

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lists_of_video_games&diff=1193268296&oldid=1193268165&variant=en

ObiKKa (talk) 23:17, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@ObiKKa No, we don't need to create a linked page for each of those things. Each of those things must demonstrate that they pass WP:LISTN. Categories are a lesser hurdle than list notability. Categories belong in category space, and the List already links to the parent categories so a user can find them. Flatten out the category structure is not what we should be doing when we have a literal system for navigating them. -- ferret (talk) 23:19, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

OK. Then why didn't you delete the old categories that were there before I wasted my time adding others?

Also why are you writing in wiki nerd speak? That language is difficult to understand for regular people.

ObiKKa. ObiKKa (talk) 23:22, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@ObiKKa I did delete the old examples. You even linked above where I did so. I am not a magic god who immediately finds all problematic content. You revealed that an issue existed, and I cleaned it up when I became aware. I'm sorry that using a wikilink shortcut is too "nerd speak", here: Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone_lists. -- ferret (talk) 23:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, after much time spent adding those stuff!

ObiKKa ObiKKa (talk) 23:38, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@ObiKKa I will try to psychically predict the next time you're about to make a problematic edit and let you know ahead of time. -- ferret (talk) 23:41, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Come on, are you really complaining about people using wiki terminology on Wikipedia? Where do you think you are right now? What else would you realistically expect? Sergecross73 msg me 23:31, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@Sergecross73 Hey, you. I am sure that most people who edited on Wikipedia like me or do so irregularly (other people) don't bother or want to understand much of all these 'terminology' stuff inside the behind the scenes guideline pages of Wikipedia (which are also really tedious and difficult to wade through anyway). It's rude to make assumptions about other people's skills and activities.

Most readers and editors just only see or prefer to see the historical pages here. OK?

ObiKKa. ObiKKa (talk) 23:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Are you really trying to lecture me on rudeness after you criticize someone of "nerd speak"? I made no comment on your skill or intentions, I'm just saying it silly to go on a website and complain that people use the website's terminology while discussing the website on the website. Sergecross73 msg me 23:40, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:06, 11 January 2024 (UTC)