User talk:JuJube/Old Archives 2006-1

Click here for the 2005 talk page.

Re: Sailor Moon template

Frankly, I think the links to Princess Serenity and Prince Endymion are unnecessary, as those articles should really be merged into Usagi Tsukino and Mamoru Chiba, respectively. These are two examples of "one character, two names." Also, I have never heard #1 referred to or addressed by the surname of "Campbell." Could you tell me where you got that notion from? -- Denelson 83 08:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- In the very first episode of the DiC dub of Sailor Moon, Serena's mother is called Mrs. Campbell. Also, I could make an argument for Princess Serenity and Prince Endymion being superpowered alter egos of Usagi and Mamoru, and worth keeping as separate entries because of their past lives. Danny Lilithborne 08:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I never heard the name "Campbell" at all while watching the first DiC episode of SM. Denelson 83 09:00, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Check the guest credits page on IMDB. It's there. Danny Lilithborne 09:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - Well, obviously someone has erred in preparing that entry, because again, I have never encountered that surname. Do you have another source to back up this conjecture? Denelson 83 09:02, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Check DiC-era merchandise. That's all I can tell you. Danny Lilithborne 09:03, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Again, I still think it's an error. This reminds me of the dispute over #2's surname being "Anderson" or "Mizuno". Denelson 83 09:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Blame lack of planning on DiC's part. I guess they weren't sure if Sailor Moon would last, so they didn't bother giving Raye or the others a last name. Danny Lilithborne 09:06, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        I have just submitted a corrigendum to IMDB regarding this doubtful information. Denelson 83 09:38, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Okay, let me know how they respond. Danny Lilithborne 09:39, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
May I comment..? Considering these "alter egos" are in an oversimplication the same entities, just in past lives, I think that merging them seems justified, as many episodes make references to each character's past life on relation to the character. Its somewhat redundant to have seperate articles. Just my opinion.-MegamanZero|Talk 09:07, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- If that's what the Wikipedia moderators decides needs to be done, fine; I just don't want to be the one to have to do it. Danny Lilithborne 09:09, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

King (SNK character)

Hey, Danny... Just thought I'd give you a heads-up on this article, seems some fellow by the name of Snk 444 keeps reverting it to match his fancruft. Seeing as you dabble in KOF, Street Fighter, etc. as much as I do, I was wondering if you'd put your opinion regarding your consensus on the talk page. I tried talking to him, but he ignored me and blatantly said: Hey Fucko, my version is better, the fans like it more, or something to that effect. Cheers. -MegamanZero|Talk 14:40, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, dude... you're facing the SNK fanboy, they're unstoppable. You should know that after your beef with TheOrgy. Ignore shit long enough, and someone will come along and clean it up to get rid of the stink. Danny Lilithborne 14:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - No. Fanboys have no place on Wikipedia, unless they contibute in good faith, and certainly not their POV editing. Its ridiculous to think that we "can't win" agaist trolling like that. And regarding TheOrgy, its already been established that the consensus was against him anyway, and I haven't seen him since. -MegamanZero|Talk 14:53, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Well, it's like you said, I only dabble in KOF. My canon strengths are Sailor Moon and Guilty Gear. KOF's a little out of my league. Danny Lilithborne 14:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - Exactly. I'm a more Jack of all trades, but that's irrelevant; and I'm just making a simple query: Does version (the one that violates WP:NOT) work, or this version (which pratices neatness, consensus, and clear regard for WP:N)? -MegamanZero|Talk 15:00, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        I'm more of a visual person, so I'd tend to go with the former, but if it's doesnt conform to Wikipedia standard, I guess you got no choice. Danny Lilithborne 15:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        
        Thanks for your input. BTW, do you like the template I made for the KOF characters..? If you do, mind helping out and inserting them into any empty KOF articles you see..? Thanks. KOF literaly has a cast of thousands and its gonna take awhile.. -MegamanZero|Talk 15:06, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        I'll do it whenever I have free time, I have to work on my Killer7 project now. But I promise to get to it when I'm done with all the Wiki work I have to do. Later, man. Danny Lilithborne 03:01, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mio Kuroki

I notice that you tagged Mio Kuroki for speedy deletion, with the reason "Kuroki Mio is a clone of Queen Beryl that only exists in PGSM.". However, "Kuroki Mio is a clone of Queen Beryl that only exists in PGSM." is not currently a criterion for speedy deletion on Wikipedia. I have removed the speedy deletion notice. If you find that one of the criteria I linked to applies, please feel free to edit the article and apply the relevant speedy deletion notice.

As a courtesy, I have also nominated the article for deletion per the WP:AFD process and you can find the discussion here. You can also include your comments and votes on the matter. Stifle 15:07, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Methinks Danny doesn't trust Anons enough

You said: anon edit = no credibility. get an account and try again. REVERT. Humorus. Here, take a Barnstar of humor. -MegamanZero|Talk 20:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Barnstar of Good Humor may be awarded to particularly light-spirited Wikipedians who, by their unshakably good humor, consistently and reliably lighten the mood, defuse conflicts, and make the Wikipedia a generally better place to be

Hey thanks a lot. :D Danny Lilithborne 02:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Best Screenname Ever

Why thank you. :) *bows* - Onlynameicanget 07:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps

But it smelled a little of link spamming. --Golbez 09:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I use YTMND to lighten the mood when I have to be forceful on my talk pages. Danny Lilithborne 09:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Be nice

I reverted your deletion of the sister city information in the Washington article because you did not provide any explanation in the edit summary or the talk page. Sister city information is indeed relevant in articles about cities, more relevant than a lot of the crap that goes unchallenged in most articles. The information does need to be sourced, but the way to handle that is to ask for references, and not to summarily delete it, unless you know or strongly suspect that the information is libelous, a copyvio or blatant nonsense. In any case, if you remove information from an article, you need to explain why you did so in the edit summary and, if necessary, in the talk page for the article. -- Dalbury^(Talk) 13:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC) NOTE: All of the links in this comment were added by User:Danny Lilithborne -- Dalbury^(Talk) 15:28, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you felt free!

Just wondered how you came across my userpage? Mushin ^talk 00:31, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's just say a little bird told me. Danny Lilithborne 00:40, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, now I'm stumped! Mushin^talk 01:06, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Honestly, so am I. ;_; 05:51, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello!

I'm glad you enjoyed the sentence on my user page. (: — Seven Days » talk 04:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

YTMND presents "Real Men of Genius"

To all you hardworking Wiki-meisters out there. Don't you feel all fuzzy inside? -_^ Danny Lilithborne 05:51, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks ever so much. --ChicosBailBonds 06:26, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]