User talk:Dreaded Walrus/Archives/November 2006

How to put a reference properly:

In order to read this properly open the edit function and then show preview.

...(text of the article)......(article continues)...

at the end of the article your text ...(what should be listed as your reference)... gets automatically listed below the following command:

More information can be added on how the refernces appear:

Wandalstouring 20:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I just felt it was important to add it to the article, hoping that someone else would be able to change it to a proper reference, rather than just an external link. So thanks. :)--Dreaded Walrus 20:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Gitaroo Man

Hiya!

What's up? Do you like Gitaroo Man? Or did you just write the article? By the way, It's REALLY awesome! Thankz for the info cuz now I have the game!! Woot!

Thankz much:) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Demonstarr (talk • contribs) .

While I can't claim that I wrote the article (I didn't - most of my edits have been minor changes, or reverts), I can say that I am a fan of the game, and I have been for a couple of years now. You don't need to thank me personally for the information, because again I didn't write it, but I appreciate the kudos all the same. :P

Also, just as a guideline, remember to add ~~~~ to the end of the post, and it will expand to your real signature, which will include a clickable version of your name. Just helps for future readers, you know? Anyway, if you ever have any questions about Wikipedia, feel free to ask. :) --Dreaded Walrus 20:38, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey bro

Thanks for trying to help out with the article in my sandbox. However, the reason I put <nowiki> for that stuff was so that 1) the Fair Use Image would not be displayed in my Userspace, which is against Wikipedia policy, and 2) so that the code for inclusion of this article into various categories could be retained without actually putting a dead article into them. If you don't mind, I'd like to keep it that way for now. Sorry if I seem like I'm stepping on your toes; I appreciate your help. —Lantoka ^{( talk | contrib)} 10:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. =) —Lantoka ^{( talk | contrib)} 10:54, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

(after edit conflict, in response to first post) - No problem whatsoever, I hadn't thought of it like that. I reverted my own edit. Also, remember to remind your friends over at Genmay to sign their talk page comments (if they would sign up for an account too, that would be even better), as it helps keep track of who said what, and respond appropriately, e.t.c. --Dreaded Walrus 10:55, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

You know the funny thing bro? My account over there is broken. I haven't posted there in years! Your comment on the discussion page should do the trick though. ;) Thanks again for your help. —Lantoka ^{( talk | contrib)} 10:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I've added it to my watchlist, so that I can keep an eye on things, and in the rare possibility of vandalism, revert it e.t.c.

Also, I will be able to respond to comments on the talk page that way, and add any unsigned templates that will almost certainly be needed from time to time. --Dreaded Walrus 11:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi again

Hey again! Thanks 4 the advice- I'll be sure to do that soon! see- look! ^-^

Demonstarr 19:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

PS3!

Hey once again:)

Well, today is release day 1 of the PS3. I heard that some guy got shot for loitering. Do you think that the PS3 will be worth the wait? AOTS doesn't think so. They say that the Xbox 360 will kick it's ass. My friend says that there were a lot of people waiting there for it. I think they'll all be dissapointed with the results. I was watching the Tokyo Game Show last night and there are a lot of great games in Japan right now. What do you think? Personally, I think that the Wii is the dominator. They say it's gonna be casual to play, too.

P.S: Gitaroo Man rox!!

Demonstarr 14:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

You'll have to let me know what you think of the PS3, because I don't live in North America. I live in England, and it doesn't come out over here until March, at the earliest. :(

Hehe, I'm looking forward to the Wii though, and that is coming out over here in December, which isn't too long after the NA launch. Nintendo Loves Me. :P --Dreaded Walrus 15:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! from User:The Mekon

Cheers, Old Walry. The Mekon 17:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem. It seems some people just can't see sarcasm, poor people. --Dreaded Walrus 17:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Turkey Bowl Deletion Nomination

I've nominated Turkey Bowl for deletion [[1]], if you'd like to take part in the debate. Thanks for directing me to the AFD instructions, too. Héous 18:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all. I'll make my way over there in a little bit. One thing I should mention is you've got to be careful about leaving messages such as this on users' talk pages, as it may be regarded as soliciting votes, which is against policy. As I was involved in the talk page just moments earlier it's fine, especially as I had already mentioned that I, too, agree it should be deleted, but just as a general warning in future be a bit careful. :) --Dreaded Walrus 18:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, that wasn't my intention. I'll be more careful in the future. Héous 18:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Nicolás Millán

• I have added the citation you have requested. With Thanks Kurt000 22:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I know how to do them, I just can't get my head round it.

Like rugby. --Dreaded Walrus 00:08, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Military brat

Hey Walrus, Just out of curiosity, other than the problem with the focus of the article being on the US, what did you think of the page military brat. I'm working on improving it, but don't know where/what needs to be improved. Unfortuantely I can't find anything on non-US brats right now... so what else can I do to improve it? I'll watch your page for a response.Balloonman 16:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't read the whole article - I was just browsing Wikipedia, saw the template and a quick speed-read made me think that it deals with the US side of things, so I just swapped it for the correct, more precise template.

The problem is, I would say that the whole "military brat" thing is a lot more common in the US than elsewhere. They do exist elsewhere in the world, such as here in the UK, but it's nowhere near as common, and I don't think the same term is used. I suppose it's similar to soccer mom. Parents with similar kinds of ambitions for their children exist over here too (although very rarely), though the term soccer mom is rarely used, as we prefer the term football over here for the sport, and for the parent the terms mum, mam or even mother are used.

Going back to the whole military brat thing (sorry for the sidetrack, I often do that), I aren't too clued up on the military in general, though my brother is in the army, and I could ask him in a couple of weeks when I next see him. Until then, there's always google, when you select results only from the UK.

As for other ways the article may be improved, again I only had a quick scan through, but perhaps a section on references to the term in popular culture, or how the media uses the term, or links to similar terms, as in the article on Chavs.

Sorry I couldn't be of any more help. :) --Dreaded Walrus 16:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

thanks for the thoughts... I'm probably going to add another section to the article because I've been investigating this weakness... and apparently, most of the funding for research into military brats has been from the US military. So I'll probably add a section discussing the research funding and why it is US centric and why the conclusions may not apply to non-US brats. I've also been told that British service members live off base more and might move more while their families stay put...Balloonman 19:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, I went back an added a section on the research into Military Brats. My own experience (which is rather limited) is that the research had a heavy US bias and relatively recent (past 20 years.) While reading a compiliation of sociological studies, I came across two interesting facts:

• Most research is relatively new as the subject has only been studied for the past 20 years.
• Most of this reseach is sponsored by the US Armed Forces.

Currently there is extremely little done in other countries. I was wondering if, based on the bias within the research and the explanation in the article, would it be appropriate to remove the template? I won't do it because I'm biased, so I thought I'd have you take a look at it. PS respond here, I'm watching your page.Balloonman 17:29, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Yep, I've done that now. I've also modified some of the references, as if you look at the references in the old version, some of them (such as reference two) end in the author, but don't have a space after the full stop (or period), which looks a bit bad on the eyes, so I added spaces to all of them, too. I've also added the page to my watchlist now, so I can track it for the next couple of days :) --Dreaded Walrus 18:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

your rv on pinkerton

why did you wipe out those notable alumni from pinkerton's page? granted they arent FAMOUS, but they are somewhat notable. --[sebsmoot] 04:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

You know, I never even looked at the edit history. I was just browsing Wikipedia, as we do (a friend I was talking to online goes to Pinkerton Academy, it seems), and all I saw was a clearly POV alumni section. So firstly I just removed the clearly POV words (which looking at the history would have been a full revert of the previous edit, and nothing else), and then I saw that there were people there that did not have articles. Generally, most notable people in lists of notable people are links to articles that exist. I can't claim to have heard of any of these people bar Alan Shepard, not being from the US, so I just figured these people might be little-known TV personalities, you know? Either way, I'm sure you know more about the subject than I do, so feel free to re-add those people if you like, my edit was mainly for removing those POV words. :) --Dreaded Walrus 04:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)