Talk: DjMack/Archive 3

< User talk:DjMack

Moving pages

It's better to use the "move" function at the top of the page to move pages to different names, rather than copying and pasting the contents of the article. -LtNOWIS 03:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

  • If there's only a redirect and no other history, it should be possible for anyone to move another article over it. If not, than an administrator can do it. It's not a big deal this time though. -LtNOWIS 03:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Speculative edits

In the Hammertong article's edit history, you wrote "ok, i'll remove that, never read the book, just trying to get sources together." Please don't make speculative edits based on what you think happens in a book. Doing so results in inaccuracies and fanon. jSarek 22:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  • The edit adding the source to the information was still speculative. Anyway, I know you've been here for a while; I think you just caught me in a bad moment with an edit summary that set off red flags. jSarek 09:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Uploading images.

Do not upload duplicate images. We already have a higher res copy of File:Star wars the force unleashed.jpg located at File:Fuapprentice.jpg. Do it right or don't do it at all. Galen Marek 20px (Personal Comm) 00:55, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

  • I wasn't aware. And don't tell me not to do it at all, I've been here many more years then year. Actually, you've only been here for two weeks. DjMack 00:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
    • As the Admins are well aware, I have multiple accounts, none of which are being used maliciously. And that image was ridiculously easy to find. Also, I am only telling you to do something right if you are going to do it at all. Galen Marek 20px (Personal Comm) 01:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Whatever, not a big deal, I'll put the new one up for speedy deletion and replace it with the other. DjMack 01:06, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Battle of the TIE Fighter Construction Facility

Hey DjMack, I added another objection to your nom on the GAN page and thought I'd make sure you knew about it. Aqua Unasi 01:52, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

  • Hey, I thought I'd let you know that there is currently a vote going on on this GAN by the AgriCorps to remove this nomination, since it could be argued that it is inactive. If you are working towards fixing the objections, I'd leave a quick note in the comments section of it's nomination saying that you are doing just that, or whatever. Or, fixing some objections could keep it active too. If it remains inactive for much longer, or receives the necessary number of votes from AgriCorps members, then the nomination will be removed. Cheers, Greyman(Talk) 13:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

One tip

Hey DjMack, I've seen that you are really working on your GAN article. Next time you address an objection, write something like "Addressed", "Fixed" or "Done" under the objection. If you do this, the people can see that you addressed it and may strike their objection. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk to me 18:30, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Wayland

So you mailed Leland Y Chee about this battle, did you get any answer? --Modgamers 17:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Your edit to Talk:Jean-Luc Picard

I removed your note, as it didn't seem to add any productive discussion and could be taken as an insult to another user. If you have something to say about the article, please say it more clearly. Thanks, —Silly Dan (talk) 21:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Reversions

Sorry, but a SH tread that you started today, which is neither closed nor done through consensus is a valid reason to remove them. If you want to make a change to something such as that, it needs to be brought up in the Consensus Track forum and voted upon by the community, rather than a handful of user's comments. If the community votes to remove them, then by all means, lets remove them. Until that point, please leave them in place. Thank you.

— Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 00:02, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

P.S. While they are not sourced, you could help us to source them. There are guides and chronologies produced by LFL directly and Wizards which list these. The links are not arbitrary. I don't have all of them, and perhaps you do. We could use your help sourcing them. Otherwise, let us leave them be for now.

  • I understand and appreciate the willingness to do that. However, unless you have all the sources, there is no way to determine, by yourself, that the chronology is fanon. Please be aware that there are thousands of sources that we can use to place battles and missions with the Galactic Civil War. The placements might not be sourced, but they are not random. The game Rogue Squadron covers its own individual timeline, while the whole of the galaxy was moving forward through thousands of others. If you feel that a certain one or two are incorrect, find who added them in the history of the page and contact that user. I am sure that they would be able to find the source if it is in fact true. — Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 00:11, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Kessel

There aren't two events taking place. The rescue of Wedge Antilles isn't an event; it's all part of the one battle that takes place. It's best to keep it as a single article. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

  • Hey, just seconding what Tope said, it'd be best to leave it as a single article. You can just include details about the rescue in the one battle article. Thanks. Chack Jadson (Talk) 19:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Removing warnings

In addition, please don't remove warnings from your talk page. Chack Jadson (Talk) 19:06, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

"Battle of Massassi Temple"

Hey DJ, I saw you created the Battle of Massassi Temple article as "Bly1993," which is now a redirect to Fifth Battle of Yavin 4. Is there any source you got this from that literally calls it the "Battle of Massassi Temple"? Thanks. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:44, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Battle of Sullust GAN

I'd like to ask whether you've addressed the objections for your Battle of Sullust GAN. If you have, I'd like to encourage you to leave something on the GAN page, as reviewers tend not to review their objections until the nominator has stated that the article is ready for another look. Thank you. CC7567 (talk) 06:23, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

  • If you have addressed any of the objections, I strongly urge you to say something on the GAN page, or at least state that you still intend to work on the article. By Sunday, it will have reached the three week period of inactivity and may be subject to an AC removal vote. CC7567 (talk) 03:59, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

What are you doing?

Showdown at Devaron has been taken by me for WP:TCW. You cannot simply take this article without consulting me. You must keep a sharp eye for taken projects listed in WP:TCW. Please stop editing. Also, Showdown at Devaron and Battle of Devaron are two separate battles. JangFett (Talk) 04:13, October 4, 2009 (UTC)

  • I apologize if I sounded angry last night. And yes, I did sign up to rewrite the article a few days before CoD aired. If you like, you may help me write the article, DjMack. Since you have already began, we can turn this into a co-project. You may revert any edit I did last night and merge the articles back together. Your work is saved; you just have to revert my edit from the "Battle of Devaron article. :) JangFett (Talk) 14:43, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
    • No, it's a wiki, DjMack; anyone can edit. You can continue working on it. I planed on rewriting and taking this to the FAN page. Just to give you some advice, you should take a look at different battle articles; such as Battle of Christophsis. Your current layout for the article doesn't follow Wookieepedia's battle Layout Guide. :) JangFett (Talk) 14:50, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
      • With your permission, I like to begin work on the article now. :) JangFett (Talk) 02:35, October 5, 2009 (UTC)

Updating Bane

As CC7567 promoted Cad Bane to GA status, I would suggest that you not update the article with information from "Children of the Force." As the author, it is CC7567's job - and not yours - to keep the article up-to-date. Grand Moff Tranner 20px (Comlink) 00:45, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

  • Consider this an official warning. Cad Bane is not your project, regardless of what you think. Your edits only detract from the article's quality, so I advise you to stop editing the article. It will be updated by CC when he gets a chance - not you. Grand Moff Tranner 20px (Comlink) 00:51, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Re: Children of the Force

Yes; I plan on doing that shortly. JangFett (Talk) 00:56, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Mission to Mustafar (Clone Wars)

I've stepped in added the {{YouMay}} tag. Please note that you shouldn't be adding years in article titles, unless other choices are in use. (Clone Wars) is suitable for the title. JangFett (Talk) 01:10, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

  • I have to agree with you; however, it seemed more like a mission rather than a "skirmish". You do whatever you think is right, DjMack, since it's your project. :) JangFett (Talk) 01:25, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Misuage of the LG

DjMack, I have been noticing that you don't follow the Layout Guide. For battles, whatever the title the article may be, i.e, "Battle", "Mission", 'Skmirish"; there has to be a section within the article that says "The battle" or "The mission", or "The skirmish". I've been seeing you do "Bane's mission," or if the article's title has "Mission" within, you say "The skirmish" within the article. Keep it consistent with other GA or FA battle articles you see that follow the proper layout. Also, for your intros, if the article is conjecture titled, you need to write and bold "battle", "mission", or "skimish", depending on the article's title. You cannot bold terms such as: "Investigated" or "tasked." JangFett (Talk) 22:39, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Re: black stall station

All right. Also, in the future, if you don't plan on finishing a project, then try not to take so many. :) What episode was this "Senate security crisis"? JangFett (Talk) 00:44, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

  • I would wait until the episode aired. JangFett (Talk) 02:02, October 11, 2009 (UTC)
    • It's not even confirmed to have been a "battle," which is what battle articles are made for. Wookieepedia isn't for making articles on every single minuscule event that happens in Star Wars. Please be patient and wait till the episode airs before assuming like this. CC7567 (talk) 18:48, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Re:battle of devaron

Yes; I still plan to do this article. I've been very busy lately, and I plan on working on this either tonight or tomorrow. :) JangFett (Talk) 22:31, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Re:second mission to rodia GAN

I'll get to that in a little bit. JangFett (Talk) 22:59, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

Re: Mission to the Jedi Temple

Yes, I do. CC7567 (talk) 05:57, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

  • As a random note of advice: please keep in mind that {{Ref}} tags are only used in infoboxes, never in the body of an article. Please familiarize yourself with WP:S and the other policies here. CC7567 (talk) 03:12, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Second mission to Rodia

DjMack, if the Second mission to Rodia is not your top priority at the moment, it should not be up on the GAN. JangFett's rather major objections have gone unaddressed for days while you're off doing your own stuff. Please get your priorities straight; if you don't intend to handle Rodia, then it should not be nominated. CC7567 (talk) 21:09, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

  • And while we're on the subject of you taking on projects that you can't handle, I'll take the opportunity to inform you that the article for the Battle of Hoth has already been taken by another user, one with far more experience in writing FAs and GAs. I suggest that you let him handle it, and that you focus solely on your current GA nomination. Grand Moff Tranner 20px (Comlink) 21:16, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

Rogue Squadron article spelling and grammar errors

DJMack, if you are going to do a major edit to this article, you can at least check your work for spelling and grammatical errors before hitting the "Save page" button. I would have undone the edits you made, not just because of the bad spelling and grammar, but because you also cut some well written material from the article. However, I am giving you the courtesy of acknowledging the edit template you have up, and am encouraging you to copy the article, edit it in the sandbox, then paste your proofread edits back in. I am sure that your work will be good when it is done, but experimenting with correction is what the sandbox is for. GethralkinHyperwave 20:14, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

  • Since you have not bothered to respond, I checked to see how things were going...and was quite disappointed and disturbed at your liberal deletion of other people's contribution (such as the large portion of the formerly-labeled Early Actions section). Overhauling an article is fine..if you are considerate of the communities previous participation and hard work in contributing valid information to an article. Just because you feel the need to move things around and re-categorize an article does not give you license to delete established content. As a result, you have created more work for others to came behind you and fix. GethralkinHyperwave 04:23, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

WP:TCW

Hello everyone, this is CC7567 from WookieeProject The Clone Wars. It is currently six months after the project was started, and the number of individual projects is steadily growing. While I am happy that so many of you are writing for the WookieeProject, the majority of articles there have been sitting there for months. Several users even have ten projects or more at the moment, and I am frankly just disappointed at the level of inactivity that is befalling our articles. I understand that many of you have other obligations, and while I respect that, the responsibility falls to you to judge whether or not you're still capable of writing all of these articles, whether in time or in energy. For this reason, I once again urge you to reconsider your current projects. The criteria should be that you have the unrelenting intent to finish all of your projects within the next month. I myself have had to reconsider my own projects on account of real-life time constraints. I do not want to have to set a limit to the number of projects per user, but if it comes down to that, I will, because I do not want to see the project deteriorate and hope that you do not want to either. Thank you. CC7567 (talk) 19:24, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

Your GAN

Hey, DjMack. Just so you know, you cannot remove any nomination from the GAN or FAN page. You can, however, request to remove your nomination on IRC or on the page. I'm sorry for not looking over any of my objections; I've been fairly busy. JangFett (Talk) 22:26, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Inuse

Please only use the {{Inuse}} tag for articles you actually intend to work on. Your consistent pointless tagging of articles takes quite some time to clean up. --Imperialles 13:49, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Space Battle at Kuat

Please note that you have an outstanding objection to the Space Battle at Kuat GAN that has been left unchecked for more than a week after the nominator satisfactorily addressed it. If you do not check it yourself, the ACs will strike it for inactivity. Thank you. CC7567 (talk) 05:10, November 13, 2009 (UTC)