I wanna run something by you; in the lead, it states "Following the event, Goldberg continued to feud with Triple H", alright, then the next sentence talks about them meeting at Unforgiven, now, this is all me, but shouldn't the sentence about them continuing their feud and meeting at Unforgiven, maybe, be combined together, instead of it one sentence and then another? -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)22:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's true. But, I remember when I was fixing stuff of a GA review, I was told to combine the sentence or something. IDK. Like I said, I wanted to run it by you. -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)22:35, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, your talking to a GA reviewer. ;) I'm just kidding. Yeah, it all depends on what the reviewer thinks the sentence should say. I sorta do wish they wouldn't make it so damn tough though when it comes to reviews. I was tempted to review Backlash '03, but dang, its long. :p -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)22:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
TBH, it has some similarity to SS'07. But, I think after getting it done with the GA review, that's when you nominate it, the article has the chance at being FA. ;) Let's just hope the "system" cools down. :p -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)23:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I remember. Believe me, I've read SS'07 and the vocab is there. Not that is a bad thing, but that's why it failed. The funny thing about this is that Gary told me in order for a PPV to be FA status, it should contain the "vocab". :p -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)00:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Probably, let's try a test with it. ;) I know you told me, I just want to be sure. I'm sorta having thoughts on adding it to Shawn's article, to replace Hoffco and PWWEW. But, IDK. -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)01:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome. ;) If you're interested, I have an article up at GAN. ;) Hey, do you think you can help out with writing the event for the Bash '06? -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)00:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, me and LAX will be waiting. ;) Awesome, you are such a lifesaver. :P And, no thank you's needed, I told you I was going to review the article and I stuck with my word. -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)00:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but I really didn't do any work, so I don't think I deserve credit. Um, I just went through SS and looks fine, if there were problems then I would have mention it at PR. Question: Why are the wrestlers real name mentioned after their ring name? Hey, how does Unforgiven '03 look? -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)00:22, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, well I don't know what's going on these days with what needs to be done with the PPV's. Um, I don't really want to put a PR up, but if you have time to give the problems out, I'll be sure to fix them. Not today, I gotta log off in a little while. But, it would be most appreciated it. ;) -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)00:46, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, cool. I guess that can work and I wish you good luck with SS passing FA. ;) Maybe we can collaborate on a PPV and see if its FA material. :P -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)00:56, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As you may know, the StatusBot responsible for maintaining the status of the Highly Active Users was taken offline. We now have a replacement in the Qui status system. This semi-automatic system will allow you to easily update your status page found at Special:Mypage/Status which the HAU page code is now designed to read from. If you are already using Qui (or a compatible system) - great! - no action is needed (other than remembering to update your status as necessary). If not, consider installing Qui. You can also manually update this status by changing the page text to online, offline, or busy. While it is not mandatory, the nature of HAU is that people are often seeking a quick answer from someone who is online and keeping our statuses up-to-date will assist with this. Note if you were previously using your /Status page as something other than a one-word status indicator, your HAU entry may have been set to "status=n" to correct display issues. Please clear this parameter if you change things to be "HAU compatible". Further questions can be raised at WT:HAU. This message was delivered by xenobot23:00, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In many video game articles, the Reception section is the last main section of prose. As its name suggests, within the section you should summarize the critical reaction to the game. The section should provide a high-level overview of what the critics liked and didn’t like about the game; it is a summary, not a repetition of what publications thought. Therefore, don’t put in excessive, long winded quotes or have a paragraph detailing IGN’s thoughts on the game. To prevent cluttering of the prose with scores, reviews table such as {{VG Reviews}} can be used to organize this kind of information.
A good way to lead off the section is a by-the-numbers or at a glance snapshot of the game’s reception; you can use aggregate scores to suggest an overall critical response to the game, and can provide sales figures (if you have them) for the game’s release. Commonly, the rest of the reception is broken into positive and negative paragraphs. Entirely separate ‘Praise’ and ‘Controversy’ or ‘Negative comments’ or the like are strongly discouraged as troll magnets. If the game has won any awards, then listing them at the bottom of the reception section is an option.
Other things to remember:
Don’t list every single review in the reviews table; likewise, don’t mention every award the game has ever gotten.
Generally, talk about what the reviewers say rather than speaking for them; for example, “Reviewer X of Publication Y took issue with elements of the game such as X, Y, and Z” instead of “Review X said that “I took issue with elements of the game such as X, Y, and Z.” If a reviewer has a good comment which sums up the positive/negative/overall reaction, or a particular sentiment common in many reviews, it might be more appropriate to use.
If adding sales data, make sure to provide context; did it sell those 4.2 million units within three months of release or three years? If possible, break down the sales by region; did the Japanese like the game, but Americans not buy it?
Use reviews whose scores are outliers from the average ratings to find key points that were liked or disliked about a game. If all reviews except for one average around a 9 out of 10, and the one is a 7 out of 10, there is probably some clear negative points to be found in it; the same works with very positive reviews.
Perhaps most importantly, give proper weight and keep a neutral point of view. If the game received mostly negative scores, having three paragraphs on positive aspects and glossing over the bad parts in a sentence or two conveys the wrong impression to readers.
Okay, I haven't place many references in the event section yet of Lockdown but I have placed as many as I'm going to in the background. I will place a few more in the aftermath tomorrow. I wanted to get your response from what I've done so far. Here is where Lockdown is.--WillC09:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, me again. How have you been? Long time no message writing. Anyway, I'm done with Lockdown. I've placed all the references I could find in there. I probably didn't source the Event section greatly because I was copying off of December to Dismember (2006). Well the most I used one reference was probably around 10 times. I have 49 references in the article. It is in my sandbox at the moment because I wanted to make sure everything is fixed before placing it back into the article. My sandbox is located here.--WillC08:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will fix the placement of the references. I'm going to keep the other feuds in there because the article is about the whole event, not the 3 main storyline matches.--WillC21:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why? They are all important. If the article is about 3 matches then the entire article shouldn't be written or made. It should just be called TNA World Heavyweight Title Match April 13. Or 3 main matches April 13.--WillC22:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, but it just makes no sense to me why a rule would even be made saying only 3 to 4 matches should be placed in the article. That isn't talking about the event. Okay. Is there anything else that I have to fix? I feel I've done everything else. It sounds good. It is kind of a summary. I have references. Links are all correct. It has been looked over by a automatic peer review.--WillC22:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks greatly for your help. I hope I wasn't a bother. Just trying to get my first article to GA and trying to learn all the ends and outs from a more experienced editor. I'll place what I've done in my Sandbox back into the article and wait for the peer review to close on the 13 I believe.--WillC22:55, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey man I really do not know why SVR 2009 should not have a roster list yet.I just do not get it.Well you got more experience so you may be right.--Shabe0mac (talk) 00:45, 10 July 2008 (UTC)Shabe0mac[reply]
Could I use your engenuis chart (here) to improve my list? I will credit you fully for creating it. Please respond on my talk page. --CG was here. (T - C - S - E) 21:16, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That list was determined as too small. Royal Rumble is another example, although that doesn't implement that table, and arguably more information can get put into there. D.M.N. (talk) 21:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It looks pretty good. It should be good to go. I'm kind of surprised that there isn't enough content to build it into a Featured Article instead. The text in the "Main Event(s):" column is really small for me; also, the colons (:) are not needed in the column headings. Gary King (talk) 02:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I like to create articles by starting them in my sandbox first so if you dont see them automatically, just search: User:Gears of War/article name. KingRock(Gears of War) 21:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have to log off. I'll try to return later tonight to finish helping(I got dibs on creating the Republic Building article!) KingRock(Gears of War) 22:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Of course! We could always use the help ;) The only thing that is really left is article creation, but pretty much all of the articles left are about complexes, so it takes a little longer to write them. Cheers, Rai•me00:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Slam! Sports and WrestleView provide enough detail for the match results, don't they? Do you have the event on DVD? D.M.N. (talk) 15:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, man. I'm up for anything. I'll look into it tomorrow. I am currently working on two other articles, so progress may be slow. ;) –LAX22:17, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It seems excessive to do both. I generally don't use Peer Review anymore because the last three or four got only a semi-automated review. GaryColemanFan (talk) 17:32, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the feud between Jericho and Christian & Stratus. There really isn't much, but that was all I could find. –LAX14:19, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, man. I know, I'm having trouble with wording. I could only seem to use "as part of the storyline" and "as part of the scripted events." –LAX01:05, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Per this edit and the discussion here, date linking is not mandatory in articles. This mainly applies to the project's pay-per-view expanded articles. Please take this regulation in notice and apply it to the project's expanded pay-per view articles.
New parameters have been added to the {{Infobox Wrestling event}} template, for the discussion explaining these parameters, see the discussion here
Our goal is to get the number of Stub-Class articles below 600. The current count is 625. It would be greatly appreciated if anyone could help expand and/or source an article or two. A list has been placed on the stub article subpage of stub articles of well-known wrestlers that should be fairly easy to improve.
Delivered: 16:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)
RE: Do I know?
I've don't expand many recent pay-per-view articles, so I don't know of any. I thought WrestleView might have do reviews, but I looked just now and couldn't find anything but results. I'm sorry I can't be of more help. :( Nikki31119:45, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
RE:
I felt it was useless. TNA only has four titles. TNA's website and WWE's website are very different. They just have the title history all rolled into one, they have really no archives, and I've got alot to do right now. Lockdown goes up for GAN here in a few days. I'm about to place Sacrifice (2008) up for a Peer review after I'm done with it in my sandbox. I have to finish Victory Road (2008), Destination X (2008), and the TNA 2008 World X Cup Tournament (which I'll try to get to Fl, when I start to work on it). I have to copyedit Slammiversary (2008) and add references in it so it will be a GA. Trying to get this article to FL right now can wait. No one is going to edit it besides me and a few others that find it. Thanks anyway, though you can try to work on TNA Bound for Glory which is TNA's main ppv of the year. I was eventually going to do what you're trying to do with WWE No Way Out with it and all the other TNA ppvs.--WillC02:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I've noticed that a few PPV articles have been stating how many titles were defended. Does that have to be done for all PPV articles now? Also is adding the section "Reception" have to be done for all now or is that just for ones that are being made for FA?--WillC03:23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, well crap this is going to be a problem for me since I can't get the buyrate stuff from TNA and I don't know where to look. I can do the titles part and what Wrestling Observer and Slam thought of the ppv but the buyrate and a few other things for PPVs will be hard on the TNA side since they aren't a publicly traded company like WWE is.--WillC04:05, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
