User talk:Eldarone

Annoyed Readers section deleted?

I put a paragraph in about a bunch of annoyed readers giving Jerry Pournelle a hard time about not finishing the Janissaries series, and gave a link to Amazon where the comments are rife. A Google will confirm. You took it out. Why? It's fair comment, backed up by other readers, and should stay. ???

It's largely irrevalent, and needless. A few opinions does not make it fact. --Eldarone 01:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to disagree on all points. And for every posted opinion you will have hundreds, if not thousands, of people who don't bother to post. I can tell you that readers get truly annoyed with authors don't bother to finish their work. If Amazon, and others, allow such critism to be posted about authors so inclined, then so should Wikipedia. I'm going to put back my post. J. --Jackaman

It dosn't matter. I few reviews on Amazon.com may only show a small precentage of the fan base. It's not Wikipedia policy to state nonverfiable information or orginal research. It's just not relavant to the article. --Eldarone 03:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like someone else has agreed with me and put in a whole series of documented information on the issue and the links to prove it. And this has caused the author of the series in question to post the first three chapters in the 4th book, also documented. And I have reason to believe it was the author himself who did so under an alias. Leave it be.

--Jackaman

The issue at hand was not that the series is inncompelte, but rather wither or not the Annoy Reader section was verifable or relavant to the article.--Eldarone 16:35, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "Annoyed Reader" section is both verifiable and relevent in all respects, and potential readers most certainly DO want to know if their author of choice has left them high and dry. Even his publisher's own web blog, Baen's Bar, has comments posted from multiple readers over the last many years since the last novel. Read the reviews of his other works on Amazon, even more comments along the same vein. Looks like plenty of annoyed readers to me. But this is all moot as other Wiki editors have expanded the topic well past what I had posted.

--Jackaman

First of all, it's fancruft just to add what is one fan's interpretation of the negative reviews on one non-scholary resource. It's one thing to write that there have been some discontent by the fans that the series was never finished, but to say they're annoyed is adding bias interpretation of those reactions. If you don't have anything that is relvant to say, then this discussion is over. Please continue to contribute to Wikipedia standards.--Eldarone 22:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Digital world article

Hey, i noticed that we seem to be in a process of reverting each other's edits over there.

The last edit i made there, i left note on the page history to refer to the talk page. Can you please take a look at the talk page for the article "Digital world" and read the explainations i left?

I basically explained why i made the edits i did, and why i think they should stay on the article.

It seems like we're disagreeing on a few facts in regards to the nature of the digital world. There's not much point of us continueing to edit the article back and fro, so can we try to settle the matter on the talk page?

For the time being, i don't mind leaving the article as it is (after your last edit), but i'd really appreciate it if you could make a reply onto the talk page and explain why you keep making those edits.

Yaksha 01:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just didn't find the arguments convincing enough to justify the changes. --Eldarone 12:53, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then can you please edit some arguments of your own to justify the changes you make to the article. Quite clearly, i consider your changes wrong as you consider mine to be wrong. If you find my arguemtns not convincing, then please either point out what's wrong with it or explain your own arguments; instead of simply assuming your version is correct until prove otherwise.

I will respond to the two points you have bought up on the article's talk page. But neither of them actually Yaksha 01:13, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

==Welcome== Hello Eldarone and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad you've chosen to join us. This is a great project with lots of dedicated people, which might seem intimidating at times, but don't let anything discourage you. Be bold!, explore, and contribute. Try to be civil by following simple rules and signing your talk comments with ~~~~ but never forget that one of our central tenets is to ignore all rules.

If you want to learn more, Wikipedia:Tutorial is the place to go, but eventually the following links might also come in handy:
Help
FAQ
Glossary
Manual of Style

Float around until you find something that tickles your fancy. One easy way to do this is to hit the random page button in the navigation bar to the left. Additionally, the Community Portal offers a more structured way to become acquainted with the many great committees and groups that focus on specific tasks. My personal favorite stomping grounds are Wikipedia:Translation into English as well as the cleanup, welcoming, and counter-vandalism committees. Finally, the Wikimedia Foundation has several other wiki projects that you might enjoy. If you have any more questions, always feel free to ask me anything on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- Draeco 08:21, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Date eras

Please do not change date eras in articles: both BC/AD and BCE/CE era styles are acceptable in Wikipeida. If you wish to discuss changing the era style in any one article, you should discuss it first with the authors on the article's talk page. --Gareth Hughes 23:18, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious article

You've done the right thing on the S.P.A.A.R.T.I. article by putting up the SectOR template and opening a discussion on the talk page; already one person has chimed in. If a few other people share your sentiments, or if you find proof that it's a blatant copyvio or non-notable, then you should nominate it for deletion at WP:AFD according to these rules. Then the community can decide what to do with the article. If it survives the deletion nomination, it still needs a major cleanup, imo. Thanks for asking. Draeco 18:48, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hypnos/Yamaki Merge?

see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Digimon Systems Update#merged Mitsuo Yamaki with Hypnos (Digimon)

Do not delete criticism from this talk page

I percieved it as more as a warning than critism. I figured that it wasn't worth keeping on a talk ppage and keep the warning in mind. --Eldarone 03:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC):)[reply]

Childe Cycle - Planets

What do you think of moving the Planet list to the bottom and including crazyeddie's information from the Talk page? Fan1967 19:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I actually integegrated the information from Crazy Eddie's talk page into the Splinter Cultures section. I think the Planets should stay close to the Splinter Culture's article, since they play an important part to the cultures. What do you think of adding details about the planets to the planet section? --Eldarone 20:09, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a good idea, as the section looks awfully bare, and rather pointless. Also, the order seems random. I'd go with Sol first, then the other stars alphabetically. Fan1967 20:19, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, put it into alphabetical order, and add a little detail. I seem to rember that in one book, that the Friendly worlds were discirbed as having rocky soil. I just finished Necromancer. Although the only other extrasolar planet discribe was New Earth, it does give some details about the planet. Also, do you think a spoiler tag is necessary? --Eldarone 23:13, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At some point, as it is fleshed out. Once there are articles for the books, I don't know how much of a summary needs to be in the main article. Any halfway informative summary would include the information that Donal, Hal and Paul (sort of) are in fact the same person. That definitely needs a spoiler tag. Certainly the individual books need them. I'm skimming through Soldier Ask Not right now to refresh my memory and clean that article up. I'd forgotten what an absolute jerk the young Tam Olyn was. Fan1967 03:33, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, when I began "Soldier, Ask Not", Tam reminded me alot of Shinji Ikari, only wwith more of a backbone :) I'll try to write up a summary of NEcromancer, if I can. I may need to reread some parts just to get the facts right. --Eldarone 21:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a total rewrite on Soldier, Ask Not. Let me know what you think. Fan1967 03:43, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I love it. Well done and detailed. Very good work. --Eldarone 04:52, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Searching

I realized that my comment was quite rude and must be apologize (I was in depress that moment, but it isn't excuse). No surprise that you unable to found much of both side-story as they're very rare item. Also, due to confusion the Tiel's Impulse was mistranslate as Tale's Impulse at GOUF (and yes, I type Tiel's Impulse instead of Teil's Impulse). You might found more by search with ティエルの衝動 instead (or 新機動戦記ガンダムW Endless Waltz 最強プレイングブック（ティエルの衝動）, as it's book's full name). You might want to cantact User:AmuroNT1 as well, since he's one who provide info of both side-story at old MAHQ's message board. And yes, the storyline of both are fanfiction-ish. I might though they're fanfic as well if it isn't for Mark Simmons-san corrected some of AmuroNT1's mistake.

Again, I must apologize if my comment made you upset. L-Zwei 05:51, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IOA

Oh come on, please don't start an editing war on the stupid paragraph. The fan criticism is based on observations from several Stargate SG-1 episodes, read my comment on the talk page... Fine, I'll add some references later, but the section does belong there however. Whatever you say: it is NOT original research... The US Military DOES act perfect in Earth politics in Stargate, the members ARE stereotypical, etc etc... Maartentje 23:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is just opinion however. Bias or predjuice does not belong in any encyclopedia. --Eldarone 01:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your change to the page That Hideous Strength was determined to be unhelpful, and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. Thanks. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Tarret 01:11, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brotherhood of Nod

What happened to Parallels on the Brotherhood of Nod article? :-( I'm fairly sure that it's important to note the similarities between Nod and ensdap, and also al-Qaeda, which is a recurring theme in C&C circles. http://planetcnc.gamespy.com/View.php?view=Editorials.Detail&id=6 discusses this as well as RA2-9/11 parallels. 86.137.103.11 17:51, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Sun Universe

This is a bit of an attempt at getting more people into this site, but here goes: There is now a separate Wiki devoted entirely to Golden Sun. If you're interested in joining, don't hesitate to go in there and edit away, 'cause right now it seems that I am one of three users actually working on it. Thanks for reading. Erik Jensen ^{(Appreciate|Donate)} 20:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll create an account and try to help out. --Eldarone 20:18, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hugely appreciated. :) Don't feel pressured that you have to do anything big, though. Erik Jensen ^{(Appreciate|Donate)} 20:28, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mammoth Tank AfD

Thanks for voting to save the Mammoth from extinction, however, can I ask you to sign that vote? Otherwise the admin may dismiss that vote. Mikael GRizzly 07:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Witchhunt

We have a policy at wikipedia called "assume good faith" - so I don't really appreciate you saying I'm on a "witch hunt" in regards to the C&C series. If you feel that those articles belong here, you make your case at AFD but you don't make it about the editors involved. So in future, I'd suggest you keep your snide comments to yourself. --Fredrick day 08:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will attest to this, as I have recently been involved in quite a long dispute as well as a near edit war with user Eldarone over a trivial and dubious issue. Typical behavior exuded by his user appears to be the arbitrary placing of tags followed by the systematic ignoring of arguments of other editors as to why these tags are to be considered as unwarranted, the applying of double standards, an inconsistent work ethic and a generally very poor grasp on Wikipedia guidelines. It is heartening to discover other editors have experienced similar problems with this user, though I can't say it is at all surprising given what I have witnessed of him/her in the recent days. 84.192.126.227 07:11, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For context, see:Talk:Brotherhood_of_Nod#Philosophy_and_ideology_of_Nod. --Eldarone 16:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Keep up the great work reverting vandalism! Shell ^babelfish 14:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nowiki

"Nowiki" is a way that you can put code in and not have it act. :) In the edit summary, it will look like this: <nowiki>. There's one before and after the RFC at Talk:Brotherhood_of_Nod#Request_for_comment, just like a <ref> </ref> tag. All you have to do to turn the RFC on is go in to the edit screen for the section and cut those tags out. :) I'll go ahead and do that, so this is just an FYI. I find "Nowikis" very handy in answering questions at the help desk, since it lets you demonstrate graphically what you mean. This is my first RFC. I'm not sure how long it will take the bot to catalog it. Let's see how it goes. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also on the CNC Wiki please add more strategies and Tactics like Steamroller to the Website. Don't forget that RA2 and Generals have tactics too. If the Tiberium Universe gets those articles about Tactics like Steamrolling(Steamrolling is a GDI Strategy used by Mammoth Tanks) so does the other universes. Assaulthead is cross Wiki blocked forever by Angela and you know it.(TougHHead 08:47, 15 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Wikipedia:Wiki-liberalism

An essay I wrote, largely reflecting your criticisms of Wikipedian populism.

Wikipedia:Wiki-liberalism Zenwhat (talk) 14:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]