User talk:Emperor

This talk page is automatically archived by Miszabot. Any sections older than 14 days are automatically archived to User_talk:Emperor/Archive 2024. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by .

Brendan McCarthy Photo

Hi Emperor

Thanks for the offer of help. Brendan McCarthy sent me a photo of himself to put up on his page, unfortunately everytime I try to add the picture it’s deleted. Any chance you could put it up for me, you can find the photo here:

www.brendanmccarthy.co.uk/brendan-photo.jpg

CSI franchise

I have created the page CSI franchise, a page you said ud help contribute too once created. Do u still want to help?

Illusive arts and Dorothy Notability

I see that you have tagged them. What would need to be done to make them more notable? I've added more information with citations for where the information came from, generally interviews or reviews of their work. They are a small independent publisher, so they won't appear in things like reference USA, although they might be in Lexis-Nexis. I'm currently doing some research to make sure the entry in Lexis refers to the correct company.

Happy First Day of Spring!

Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~

If you live in the Southern Hemisphere and are entering the season of Autumn not Spring then I wish you a happy First Day of Autumn {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}!
To spread this message to others, add {{subst:First Day Of Spring}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Comic Books

(cur) (last) 04:58, 24 March 2008 Emperor (Talk | contribs) (28,328 bytes) (Undid revision 200456581 by 68.13.159.231 (talk) - Maniac18 has a point. take this to the talk page before adding it bac) (undo)
(cur) (last) 03:46, 24 March 2008 68.13.159.231 (Talk) (28,538 bytes) (Undid revision 200100761 by Maniac18 (talk)) (undo)

Sorry, what point did he make that I missed?

On the :EL page it specifically says:

What should be linked

4. Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews.

So why is linking to the review http://www.comicnerd.com site bad?

Thanks

Sean Phillips

I’m not sure of the exact date, I think it’s around 20 years old. I’ll have to ask him next time I see him. Just so you know, I have permission to upload it.

Templates

I was wondering how much you knew about templates, and if you'd be willing to help me with a problem I'm having. I recently installed the same software that Wikipedia uses (MediaWiki), and I don't understand how to get the common templates like {{reflist}} etc to work. Could you point me in the right direction? Please answer here on your talk page, as my ip address may change, best regards.

issue two

i hear CB & MI13 #2 has sold out also, so they are making second printing of that. --- Paulley (talk) 13:28, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rachel Pollack

Yes, it's time to protect the Rachel Pollack page. 02:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

(Mind if I query "why" about this, since this page is on - one of - my 'long lists' of pages to improve..?) ntnon (talk) 17:27, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is largely covered here: Talk:Rachel Pollack#Transsexual?. (Emperor (talk) 17:38, 10 July 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Right. I wondered as much, but couldn't see anything particularly telling in the main edit history. Should have thought to check the Talk Page..! ;o) ntnon (talk) 20:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It should be easy enough to fix but at the moment it is back and forth (adding, removing, etc.) when just finding some solid sources should sort it out for the most part. (Emperor (talk) 20:34, 10 July 2008 (UTC))[reply]

re: Juggernaut (comics)

Hopefully that isn't jumping the gun...

- J Greb (talk) 11:18, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh.. and I could use a second set of eyes on Phil's comments re this on my talk and the one post section of his on the article's talk. Thanks - J Greb (talk) 02:27, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comics Project branding

Quick query - are "C" and "low importance" the generic settings, or is there some rhyme or reason about which articles get which initial ratings/importance..? ntnon (talk) 17:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I agree - the workgroup, heading and whatnot are the important additions. I just wasn't sure if you/people were weighing up everything against some kind of gold standard, or whether "C"/"low" were just reasonable middle-ratings prior to better assessment. Young Romance was the one I was a little surprised to see as "low importance" - but, philosophically, I wasn't sure enough of what the baseline was for importance to worry enough about contesting it specifically..! (YR is vitally important in relation to other romance comics; reasonably important relative to other genres and titles. But then as a Kirby-comic, it's probably middling; as a longlasting comic, middling, etc., etc.) Are there any centralised decision-making guidelines/people, or is it all a little arbitrary...? (Also, there must be a way to see which articles are "High"/"A", etc., surely..? Any idea how I find it, please?! :o) I see the guidelines, and they provide the reverse-links to all articles rated a certain way, but I can't seem to separate "comics" from "everything".) ntnon (talk) 23:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Browsing a bit further... I see "top"-level rated articles include Superman, Batman and Spider-man; Comic strip, Little Nemo and Calvin and Hobbes, plus Manga, Robert Crumb.. probably some more, including - rightly - Stan Lee, Jack Kirby and Alan Moore (although not all of them have the banner, some seem to have "Category" links. And that page doesn't seem to be fully alphabetised..).

Do we need a concerted effort to rate and rank other things? (Julius Schwartz is "high" to "top," for example; Martin Goodman (publisher) should be higher than "mid", etc., etc.) Plus, some don't seem to have been ranked at all... Indeed, I see from this log page that Flash and Neil Gaiman have been downgraded recently - any idea if that will have been an individual choice or a centralised decision..?

Sorry to burden you with these queries! ;o) ntnon (talk) 23:30, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help Check It Out

Could you maybe help out on these page with displaying references in is own section; tidy it up a bit Kelvin Martinez (talk) 22:00, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Honorific titles in popular music

Well I never

I never realised that Americans spelt traveller with one L. --Allemandtando (talk) 14:33, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only answer is the establishment of a Greater British Empire. I will start immediately and you can write the wikipedia article. Be warned, I will sue wikipedia unless I am referred to as Allemandtando the first in all references to my imperial person. Yours --Allemandtando (talk) 14:46, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: Blue Beetle

Just wondering... why have you catted this with "Dynamite Entertainment characters"? - J Greb (talk) 02:26, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like your opinion as well.

(In most things, of course - grin - but this in particular at the moment.)

Please see my talk page.

I've read and re-read. I've compared timestamps of comments and edits. All-in-all, it's looking rather convincing that Phil was using his ability as an admin to edit a protected article to his own preferred version as "just another editor", rather than as an aid to the discussion.

(Indeed, phil was/is inches away from a claim of "wheel-warring" - a term that I really don't like to see. I think admins should be able to revert each other, though rarely, and when they do, there should be a good reason. With "good" being subjective, of course.)

Anyway, thank you for your thoughts. - jc37 06:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've protected the page after looking it over as you'd suggested. Please also see User talk:Phil Sandifer for more information. - jc37 20:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merlins

I might be a little confused but isnt that the same one that was in Die By The Sword... cus you know he had Fury inside him (which happened at the end of the mini-series)... after pulling it out it took the evil out of him with it and thats why he decided to help and look more like the olde Merlin? thats how i understood it. On that note i must continue to add the plot bit and do the Wisdom ones. --- Paulley (talk) 21:19, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lol, nothing in life is ever simple... yea i remember the "which me" bit when Roma asked her father to visit CB after he was resurrected the first time and i know its always been a gray area concerning Merlyn/Merlin but like i said though i think we have to mention that it is a version of Merlyn's (or his character) called Merlin who became dominant when Merlyn extracted the Fury (along with his madness) from within in himself.. that is what i thought Merlin in issue three explained it as... cus i just dont see any other way how this Merlin had a chuck of Fury inside himself. hmmm maybe its a question to ask Paul lol --- Paulley (talk) 22:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh there goes my plan then :P ... also maybe you want to change this edit then an anon user recently made in Merlyn (Marvel Comics) --- Paulley (talk) 22:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, if anything its a quick fix until there is real clarification. --- Paulley (talk) 13:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Something at John Buscema

Could you do me a favor?

User:Scott Free added and external link to the Buscema article, here's the version.

The link is to an article on Buscema on NationMater.com. That site looks a lot like a Wiki knock-off. And the article itself looks a lot like this.

I've already posted what I think are polite queries to Scott Free, here, but I'd like a second set of level headed eyes on it before one of the more enthusiastic editors of the Buscema article see it.

Thanks,

- J Greb (talk) 23:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, Scott Free reverted the Emperor edit. I restored it to Emperor's, and have commented about that particular mirror site at Talk:John Buscema. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I've just seen that Scott Free has erased J Greb's posting. [1] --Tenebrae (talk) 01:52, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More Moore

Thanks for the heads up (again). I think there's some Century notes that could be picked out, and - should there be a need for a separate page any time soon - possibly on Jerusalem. Otherwise it's just another interesting interview, but with little new.. maybe there's a quote that could be dug out and emblazoned atop the The Wire page(!) (Or, if they have any sense, the DVDs...)

Looking forward to Mr Gibbons' Watchmen book (and the film trailer's interesting, too) - I wonder whether it's worth picking through the interview for any salient stuff, though, or waiting patiently for the book itself...? ntnon (talk) 02:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having looked at what was there about Mr Gibbons generally, I've now added a fair bit of chronological information on his various major works. And tried to weave in some stuff from the interview to (although I noticed you'd already added the book itself, of course). ntnon (talk) 00:14, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Shakara.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Shakara.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 09:42, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]