Jump to content

User talk:JimmyBlackwing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pandora (talk | contribs) at 20:06, 19 April 2007 (→Copyedit Query). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Attention Blackwing

Please find my address to the editors of the Megatokyo comic article contributors on the discussion page, as it mostly pertains to you.

Thanks

Hey Black, thank you for cleaning up my Pirogoeth information. -- Psi edit 18:40, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I've been waiting for a decent reason to start editing the thing, anyway, since it was just a huge mess that I couldn't figure out how to fix. Your edit started me off, so I should probably be thanking you. JimmyBlackwing 18:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following page failed AFD. I archived it here in case you wish to keep it. -- Mostly Rainy 06:28, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rigism

Rigism is a satirical philosophy created in the 21st century by fans of the computer game Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing. The philosophy possesses a set of Ten Commandments (known as Rigmandments), and a "Book of Rigism."

The followers of Rigism believe in becoming "Winner," a physical state which was inspired by the "You're Winner" victory screen in the game. People who enjoy or praise Big Rigs are considered Winner, while those who dislike it are referred to as "Not Winner" or "Loser," both used in adjective form.

See also

Okashina Okashi

You've marked the page with the "tone" warning. Can you help clean it up? That's why I suspected the mark was in bad faith (though it seems you mean well), since simply marking without also either a) explaining on the talk page what you mean or b) trying to clean up some instances of bad tone isn't very useful. I've taken care of some (I didn't notice the emoticon before, good catch). If you see more, edit! :) And please, remember to use the talk page next time, all right? Xuanwu 20:33, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Summer of '42

I have gone over your concerns about the Summer of '42 FAC debate, and believe they should now all be addressed. I respectfully ask that you reconsider making a support vote now, if the changes are to your satisfaction.Mistergrind 20:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

networking for copy-editors

The red-button bad article comprises one perfect sentence. What's bad about it? Seems to sum up the topic well enough until expansion.

The article is not my area, so I can only suggest that Deckiller, ChrisTheDude, MarkBuckles, Seb Patrick, and Ryu Kaze. Check out their interests and histories: if they're unwilling to help directly, perhaps they can point you to people who will. Keep a list of the good people you come across for future collaboration. Tony 08:20, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll look into asking them. As for the bad article button, it is actually Special:Random, so the article you get isn't necessarily bad every single time. The random article feature usually leads to extremely bad articles, however, and as such the button will normally "work." JimmyBlackwing 10:28, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, JB. I'll try to help you out with a copyedit of the article, sure. It isn't my field of expertise to be honest with you (I had heard of Megatokyo but never really looked at it before your FAC), but maybe I can help nonetheless. I certainly hope so, as I think it's a well done and informative article so far. I think Deckiller would definitely be someone to ask for help as well. While I don't know if he's read Megatokyo, he's a great copyeditor. I never nominate an article for FA without getting input from him first. Ryu Kaze 14:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So far, I've thoroughly copyedited the lead, rearranging some info, trimming some wording where necessary, and cutting some stuff that didn't seem to have a source (for instance, the comic's title being a reference to Bubblegum Crisis; this is, apparently, a point of contention, as the article for the anime suggests that the "Megatokyo" domain name wasn't chosen for that reason). I'm not finished yet. I might not be able to go through the entire thing, but I'll certainly do at least one more section. Ryu Kaze 16:48, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Great job, thanks. I'll see if Deckiller wants to help, too. JimmyBlackwing 20:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. I've gone through the Reception section as well now, and made quite a few adjustments. The most notable changes probably involved a significant amount of the content in the New York Times quotes that was unnecessary. I trimmed it to just that which related to the idea being expressed. If I get time, I might do a little more, but in either case, good luck with the article. Ryu Kaze 20:49, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This was a huge help. Thanks! JimmyBlackwing 22:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I've now copyedited the lead, as well as the Themes, History and Recception sections. I dare not attempt to tweak the character and story sections, though, without more familiarity with this work. As it stands, the Themes section was on the edge enough probably. I think L33tminion handled most of the other stuff already anyway, and now Deckiller is going back over it and everything else, so you should be good on copyedits. I'm going to make a comment in this article's FAC that I've made an attempt at copyediting the article and that others are doing so as well. Once more, great job with researching all of this stuff and building a strong basis. I found the article to be very informative and interesting. Ryu Kaze 00:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

tokyo

Pity, I was about to change to "support". Nice effort, anyway. Tony 02:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It will probably be renominated soon, since it was so close that time. JimmyBlackwing 02:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that, mate. It had really shaped up. I'm sure it will make it next time. Ryu Kaze 20:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Final Fantasy V

Hey, I wanted to let you know that Final Fantasy V is complete in terms of the things you wanted fixed. Let use know if it deserves GA status. We are building toward FA, but your comments have been extremely helpful :) Judgesurreal777 04:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Megatokyo

So, how's the reconstruction coming? Looking over the talk page briefly, it appears you guys are trying to work out any kinks before resubmitting it. A good plan. Especially if you can get most of Monocrat's concerns alleviated, since his was the biggest objection during the FAC.

By the way, on the subject of the origin of the name "Megatokyo" which I briefly discussed with you before, I noticed this on the talk page. Without a published source to confirm that he said this, though (unfortunately, we can't use anything from Wikipedia itself as a source), we're still flying in the dark, and we'd need it to be confirmed that this is actually Rodney Caston. Ryu Kaze 03:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I haven't seen a source for the name's origin besides the Talk page comment, but I'm not discounting the possibility of its existence. Sounds like something to bring up on the article's Talk page for help on finding a source - I'll do that a bit later. As for work on the article, my lack of Wikipedia activity recently seems to have slowed things down a bit, though what is happening looks to be going smoothly. I doubt the next FAC will go as badly as the last one. JimmyBlackwing 19:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good luck with the new nomination! I've thrown in my support once again. Ryu Kaze 14:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Barnstar of Diligence
For your diligence in improving Halo: Combat Evolved and striving to correct the tiniest of errors, I award you the Barnstar of Diligence! bibliomaniac15 00:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A few ideas for Halo: Combat Evolved

I have Halo: Combat Evolved on my watchlist and have been silently seeing the improvements that you've been making. Good work so far. I have a few suggestions, some of which you might have already thought of:

  • An Audio section on the soundtrack and Marty O'Donnell's goals and ideas would be good. I think that he once said that he was aiming for a score that sounded "ancient, alien, and epic".
  • You might be interested in working into the Reception section this peer-reviewed article on Halo: Halo and the Anatomy of the FPS. It's a bit hagiographic, but it does contain an acknowledgment that the later levels were repetitive, if I recall correctly.
  • Not sure how much you want to spend on this, or where it might fit in, but a mention of Halo-based machinima (Warthog Jump's exploitation of the physics engine; Red vs Blue) would probably be warranted.

Keep up the good work, and let me know if you want any copyediting help. I'd be glad to look it over before FAC. — TKD::Talk 13:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good ideas, I'll try to work those in. And thanks for the copyedit offer - I'll gladly accept once I've finished making the article comprehensive. JimmyBlackwing 21:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to take a look this weekend. — TKD::Talk 11:10, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. JimmyBlackwing 11:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Update: It's been a busier week than I had hoped. Up through the Synopsis section is done. Hopefully, I'll get to the rest of the copyedit tonight. Sorry for the delay. — TKD::Talk 11:08, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I'm grateful that you're doing it at any pace. JimmyBlackwing 16:23, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Metal Gear Solid 3

Thanks for cleaning up the prose in that article. Some of those sections were written in their entirity by me and it's hard for me to copyedit something I originally wrote. Even though it means more work for me, thanks also for those cite needed tags - better unsourced statements get sorted out now as opposed to during an FAC.
Just on a brief note in case you missed it, I removed your weasel words tag. I think it's reasonable to interpret "We heard many voices from fans" as "many fans". -- Steel 23:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Passing Black Isle's Torn

Thanks for the prompt response on my concerns. I have passed the article, great work!UnseemlyWeasel 12:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ta

Thanks for the help with the Tintin page. I was leaving them until last, it's probably a holdover from my days in the building industry, do the snags last. Very much appreciated. Steve block Talk 18:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. As a Tintin fan myself, it was my pleasure to help keep its article featured. Good luck on the rest. JimmyBlackwing 09:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar. Even though you already have one for Halo: Combat Evolved, I think that you deserve another because the original article was in such bad shape.

The Original Barnstar
For being able to cut through all of the cruft originally in Halo: Combat Evolved and having the diligence to bring the article up to FA status. — TKD::Talk 00:52, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

F.E.A.R. editing

Hi, I've noticed you've been editing on the F.E.A.R. article after your excellent work with Halo: Combat Evolved. Just wanted to drop a few lines to say I'd like to help if you're going to work extensively on F.E.A.R.; I hope we can get F.E.A.R. to FA status or GA status with some effort! :) BTW, the removal of the Trivia section is somewhat I'm quite happy with: it never developed into anything useful, but I never dared to remove it (usually someone just pop ups and adds some of those entries randomly in the article). Another "painful" section is "References to popular media": I cobbled it together by moving several tons of entries from "Trivia", but it still feels quite clumsy to my own taste; I'd be in favour of its removal, but you're likely going to see hordes of anonymous edits putting back Office Space/NOLF/etc... refs in that case, so I'd be more than glad if you have hints to improve it. Cheers, Berserker79 15:37, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

Real glad you can help on F.E.A.R., lately there has been just a bunch of editors who contributed continually and helpfully. The structure of the article has been revamped several times and should be quite good: the "Plot" has been rewritten as well, its biggest problem being that it has to be well balanced in terms of lenght, but still needing all those details essential to understand the story. Me and a couple of other editors have played the game, so we can help on that if need be. Any suggestion regarding "Media references" is welcome, I just don't know what to do more with that section after months of trimming/rewording/copyediting it... I suppose we need some more refs maybe? Quoting some of the game lines for the plot and maybe quoting the extra contents from the DVD? Finally, Thunderbrand advised me to switch to a new pic for the box art, since the current is a MobyGames watermaked one; there's Image:FEAR box art.png available, but it's missing its source and I'm working to find it. Berserker79 12:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Noticed the box art is ok now, I probably had a cached version of the pic on my pc. As for the "Media refs" I can't say I'll be sorry to see it gone, I kept it to avoid people putting back those refs, but most of that stuff is just plain similarities and no more. However there's one thing I'd like to keep: some of the refs are... "legitimate" and I'd like to find a place to describe this tendency from Monolith to put such little hints to movies/novels/games in their games, obviously without the list. I'll do some spellcheck and copydit in the meantime. Berserker79 08:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for giving me some time to dig out a ref (bet I'll need something more than luck however). BTW, the {{or}} tagged sentence about "Domination-like" gametypes may be referenced to an online version of the "F.E.A.R. 1.05 (or higher) patch readme"; still looking for it (the firewalled pc I'm currently working on is not good for this kind of search...). Berserker79 09:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed with you about removing the weapons list. As for looking for refs I still need to find the online version of the 1.05 readme and check the Trivia entries for F.E.A.R. and Monolith Productions at MobyGames. I've also come across these links [1] and [2] on imdb.com. Don't know if we can consider these as solid references though. What would you think about them? Berserker79 08:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, I have to say that the F.E.A.R. article is progressing very nicely thanks to your efforts. After getting to "B-Class" status I couldn't come up with anything else, so I think your edits are also helping me get a better idea of what's needed to get an article to a higher status than B. Also, I wanted to let you know that you can safely remove the mostly original research "media refs" paragraph, since I haven't come up with anything useful to ref any of that stuff. If I should uncover something we can work on something better later. Still looking for good refs regarding those sposts you marked as {{or}} or {{citation needed}}. Berserker79 12:02, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the "making of" documentary: I have access to it since I have a copy of the DVD version. I'd gladly try to write down its contents, but it will take a while since the only player for the format used (Bink video) is a bit primitive in terms of controls... I dimly recall it should be available on Sierra's or Vivendi's site as well. I'll let you know about this asap. Berserker79 14:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC) Extending reply: checked the Sierra website, no trace of the videos except for the P.A.N.I.C.S. episodes. BTW, I've added two refs for the Domination-like gametypes, a link to the 1.07 readme and one Eurogamer article. Berserker79 16:57, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • There are two documentaries that could be useful, the "behind the scenes" and the 1 hour long "developers commentary". Looking at [3] I found a bunch of "trailers" for these documentaries, but they are just a couple minutes long. I'll try to see what I can do with the documentaries myself. Berserker79 15:55, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

F.E.A.R. To do list

Hello, just noticed you placed F.E.A.R. up for nomination as GA; if we get from B to GA I'm pretty much sure it will be because of your efforts, so big thanks for you edits are necessary! :) BTW, I've looked at most of the "developer's commentary" video and found nothing really relevant for addition; I used it to refer a couple of unreferenced spots in the Director's Cut section anyway. As for the "To do" list I've got a couple of questions:

  1. Using the manual to ref "gameplay". Would you advise to point to specific pages of the manual or just put the current manual ref where needed?
  2. Game script: I've been looking for it, but without much luck so far. I'll keep looking.
  3. Plot section: do we really have to rewrite it? I know you didn't play the game, but could you give a few hints to suggest what needs to be changed? We already had multiple revisions of the "plot" and I though the current looked quite good.

Thanks. Berserker79 07:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Ok, thanks for the input. So, it's a "in-universe" vs. "out-of-universe" matter about the plot. I'll try to rewrite it following the latter approach, you can probably monitor this attempt on my sandbox page here. Berserker79 08:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC) Update: I've just completed the rewrite. I'd gladly hear your comments before placing it in the F.E.A.R. article. If you have time to check it out it'd be greatly appreciated! Thanks. Berserker79 09:35, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your positive feedback. No problem if you could not read it completely, I had overlooked the fact you hadn't played the game so far, sorry about that. I'll update the main article now and do some spellcheck. Berserker79 07:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should have thought about those missing refs in the Plot, thanks for tagging them! BTW, I had an idea to work around the necessity to find the script: the SDK for F.E.A.R., once installed, extracts the contents of the game's data files; it will be quite painful, but once we know which sentences need a ref, we could wade through the extracted audio files to look for specific game lines, write them down and we get our refs. I'll try to work on it asap. Berserker79 10:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, my idea worked just fine, I've located the audio files of the dialogues we need, but I overlooked one detail: my copy of the game has full voice over into my native language, so the dialogues are not in English. I'm going to ask a fellow wikipedian some help to solve this matter. I'll keep you posted about this, in the meantime many thanks again for helping F.E.A.R. get to A-status! Berserker79 13:00, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1987

Hi. I'm making some progress on the citations. There may be a few I will have problems with, but I'll come back to you if so.

The Composition section was mostly written by Vinoir, a sadly AWOL user, who had a terrific knack for collating sources and the sounds on a record into prose. Unfortunately, it looks like in this case he didn't cite everything he'd read and also didn't really make full use of some of the sources. (Besides an online library of KLF-related newspaper/magazine articles to draw on, the early years are well covered by a library of press clippings supplied with the album Shag Times. Vinoir's job was working through the latter; working through it myself now I can see where a lot of the things he'd written about had come from... I've also been able to add a few more juicy quotes and references to All You Need Is Love (The JAMs song), which is a Featured Article about the key song on 1987'. In particular, a nice quote about the juxtaposition of samples which was one of the things you'd tagged with {{fact}}.) Thanks again for your help, although no thanks for making me have to do all this work! :) --kingboyk 15:25, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, all done. The measure of how right you are is that it took me all day and really beefed up the references. Your further thoughts at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1987 (What the Fuck Is Going On?) are most welcome. If you feel moved to support that's terrific, but if you have any other complaints fire away :)

The Composition section has been edited quite substantially, so it will need a copyedit and a decision on whether to have one paragraph per song (or perhaps one per side?). Will attend to this when hopefully feeling fresh tommorow.

Thanks again. Any further comments can be made at the FAC page or FAC talk page. Cheers. --kingboyk 00:43, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your suggestions resulted in a substantial improvement and the article looks like a solid FA candidate now. Hearty thanks are due. --kingboyk 12:28, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Empires in FAC

Empires: Dawn of the Modern World is now in FAC. I finished a couple last minute corrections and it's on the list. here's a link to the FAC and here's a link to the Empires FAC. Thanks for all your help so far; without it, Empires would never have come as far as it did. I may add a final comment to the Peer Review to close it up, and just wait to see what people think on the FAC.--Clyde Miller 00:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abraham Lure wanted me to add more about the gameplay section, so I did. If your bored, could take a look at it for grammer's and prose's sake? Thanks a million. I'm just worried that me adding more could jeapordize Empres' chances as an FA.--Clyde Miller 21:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh thanks. No rush if you are busy right now.--Clyde Miller 22:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know this may sound redundant and stupid, but thanks.--Clyde Miller 22:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is this slow down normal? or is it the article?--Clyde Miller 01:02, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be appropiate for me to contact some of the other people that left comments but didn't make a vote (like Dev920, Jeltz, or kingboyk)? Or would that be in bad taste (like asking your friends to vote in an AFD)?--Clyde Miller 20:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well Abe said he has no problems with the article, but he didn't support. Is that considered a support or should I ask him for it?--Clyde Miller 00:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey I just wanted to drop another thank you for the copyediting you've been doing to keep Empires up to standards. Most of mouse's suggestions are content related, but sometimes the prose suffers, so thanks.--Clyde Miller 20:38, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Empires failed. I suppose I'll wait for some copyeditors and then re-nominate it, or something.--Clyde Miller 21:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks for all your help, by the way. If it wasn't for you, I would have never made it as far as I did.--Clyde Miller 22:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Jimmy I was wondering, is it in good taste to mention the people who supported Empires before, or should I contact them, or should I leave it? Or should I wait unless I need more supports?--Clyde Miller 19:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay cool. I wouldn't have brought it up, but I saw it done in another FAC where thay mention who supported them last time. However, I think they are in greater need of support votes then we are.--Clyde Miller 15:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Empires

Empires just got FA status! Thanks for your continuing help and guidance.--Clyde Miller 23:14, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Wow! That was more than I expected from pr! Thanks for all your help, I'll try to rewrite the article to be more like Empires: Dawn of the Modern World, as you said. Thanks again! | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 16:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :-) | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 21:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

F-Zero GX

Hey if you're bored, could you take a look at F-Zero GX for me? I'm trying to push it to FA with FullMetal Falcon's help, so any pointers would be nice. I just put it on PR too, so I don't know how that's going to go. After seeing yours and one of mine I'm losing a little faith in PRs.--Clyde (talk) 23:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_words

Jimmy Blackwing, I would like for you to read Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_words - The sentence structure shown could easily imply a POV. WhisperToMe 08:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Convoluted syntax. Weasel words require some convoluted syntax to get a point across. "A square has four sides" is a simple sentence; "Though not universally, squares are widely regarded as having an even number of sides that has been conjectured by experts in the field to be approximately four" wraps the key point in layers of syntactic obfuscation, leaving it to be harvested out of a strange little participial phrase by the reader."

Also see: Wikipedia:Avoid_trite_expressions#Use_short_sentences_and_lists WhisperToMe 08:44, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

System Shock

System Shock has passed and been made GA-class. Good work. Cheers, Lankybugger ○ speak ○ see ○ 15:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The VG Barnstar
For your work on getting System Shock up to GA-status.

Congratulations, I feel you deserve this for making a worthy article for a game I have fond memories of! The Kinslayer 20:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hey Jim I have a bunch of assessing to do for a wikiproject I'm a part of, and I just noticed Ikiroid (a friend of mine) made an alternate account. Am I allowed to make one for assessing articles and the like?--Clyde (talk) 16:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Devil May Cry

I've added a Legacy section to the article which is pretty respectable as-is, but the reference mentioned in the FAC would no doubt help immensely. If you've got the time and access to the book, I'd love it if you added it. Cheers, Lankybugger ○ speak ○ see ○ 01:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and random aside, but when are you planning to push the System Shock article for FA? Cheers, Lankybugger ○ speak ○ see ○ 01:07, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's fantastic! I'll incorporate it into the Legacy portion of the DMC article right away. Cheers, Lankybugger ○ speak ○ see ○ 02:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Quick question, though. What page is the definition on? Cheers, Lankybugger ○ speak ○ see ○ 02:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I've incorporated it into the Legacy subheading of the Reception section, so let me know what you think! Cheers, Lankybugger ○ speak ○ see ○ 02:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take a run at the negative criticism and copyediting tomorrow, but thanks for the suggestions. Cheers, Lankybugger ○ speak ○ see ○ 02:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nice, thanks for them although I had to leave yesterday and I couldn't deal with them, it seems Lankybugger already did it but thanks for cooperating anyway. -凶 20:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the FAC, would you mind taking another look at the article and possibly re-evaluating your stated opinion? Cheers, Lankybugger ○ Yell ○ 20:07, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Megatokyo NPOV dispute

I'm back. Anyway, I was told on #wikipedia that I am 100% justified in reverting that sentence since WP:NPOV is non-negotiable - Also, the article must name sources that "praise" and "criticize" Megatokyo. WhisperToMe 00:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DMC 3 peer review

Yo, Jimmy when you can please take another look at Devil May Cry 3, it has been edited to resemble Devil May Cry and the prose has been worked on, thanks for your time. -凶 22:53, 17 April 2007 (UTC) [reply]

System Shock

Hi Jimmy,

Of course I remember you. I'd like to help out with System Shock, but someone put an article that I've worked on unexpectedly on FAC, and I might be busy seeing whether I can salvage that nomination through some prose reworking there. Maybe I'll have a chance take a look this weekend, but I doubt that I'd have any time before then. Good luck, though. It's an interesting game, from what I've heard. — TKD::Talk 10:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A strange question

Yeah I have that issue. I've been a subscriber to CGW for many years and have them all stored away. I can scan that article for you if you'd like. Send me an email at swaaye at yahoo dot com. I'm a System Shock 2 fan, myself, but haven't played the original much. A classic series to say the least.--Swaaye 17:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copy-edit

Try contacting the Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors; you can post requests on their proofreading page. I used to do some work with them before I returned to the FFWP. — Deckiller 09:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit Queries

Hi there. I'm working on this copy edit for you, and I have content question. The article says, "The game received a "Director's Edition" DVD, including a "making of" documentary, a director's commentary, a short live-action prequel and related Dark Horse comic book, and the exclusive first episode of the promotional P.A.N.I.C.S. machinima." What exactly is meant by "received"? Does it mean "packaged with"? And was the comic book on the DVD, or was that a separate item?

Also, there is the statement, "Reflex time is represented by stylized visual effects, including bullets in flight causing air distortion or interacting with the game's particle effects." Do the bullets in flight interact with the game's particle effects, or is "interacting with the game's particle effects" another example of how reflex time is represented by stylized visual effects? And what are "particle effects," anyway? Does that need to be defined? (Maybe the fact that I had to ask answers that question!)

I want to make sure I don't change the meaning of what I'm editing by accident! Thanks. Pandora 19:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JimmyBlackwing&oldid=124171496"