User talk:Kilson/Archive 2

Kite

 * Also, if you could add him to the project page's GAs, that would be helpful, as I don't have the time right now. :)  CC7567  (talk) 21:38, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

IRC
You're free. Graestan ( Talk ) 02:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Shiv
Since I believe it was you that got Shiv up to GA status, I wanted to let you know about a change I made to the article. I replaced the infobox image with a headshot without any distracting text/narration bubbles/boxes and move the current infobox image down into the Death section. Take a look, but I'm pretty sure you'll approve. :) -  JMAS  Hey, it's me! 15:12, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Argyus
Hi Kilson. Would it be possible for you to upload the image of argyus talking to padme from transfer (TCW online comic), and add it to the article and images from transfer? If not, that's okay. Thanks.--Kigon 23:29, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:TCW again
Hey Kilson. As project head for WP:TCW, I'm trying to get a better idea of who's still interested in participating in our project. If you're still interested in participating, please leave a note on my talk page or contact me in IRC. If you do not respond within a week, I will assume that you are no longer interested in participating. That doesn't mean that your name will be removed from the "Participants" list, but it means that any of your current projects will be removed from the project page so that others have a chance to work on them. Likewise, if you currently have any projects under your belt, I highly encourage you to review them, and if you don't plan on working on them within the next two or three weeks, I recommend reconsidering them. Thanks. Your project head,  CC7567  (talk) 05:47, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

A request
Hey, Kilson, could you please review an article for me? I just finished a clone named Stripe, and I'd like for someone to have a look at it before I put it on the nomination page.  Mauser  Comlink 15:39, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Fil
Hey Kilson, if you have time, could you give Fil a copyedit? Currently it is a FAN. Thanks man :)  JangFett  Talk 16:00, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

TCW online comics
Kilson, I also have written one online comic article (Bait) and I'll nomintae it when my other GANs are approved. I'm planning to do some more in the future (Switch, Prelude). --Clone Commander Lee 12:35, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Signature
Hey Kilson. I've been noticing some typos in your signature recently which, coupled with the timestamp on the sig often not matching the system timestamp on the edit, lead me to believe that you are manually typing out your signature every time. If that is the case, you can greatly simplify things by going into your preferences, copying  into the "Signature" field, and making sure the "Custom signature" checkbox is unchecked before saving. After that, simply type  at the end of your posts to sign them&mdash;this will insert Kilson Likes PIE and an automatically-generated timestamp. This both saves keystrokes and prevents errors. Thanks and may the Force be with you! &mdash;Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 07:22, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Block and warning
30px You have been blocked from editing for one month for attempting to embarrass me further on my talk page as part of the spillover from your hard-earned IRC block. Don't ever pull this sort of crap with me again or the blocks are going to get severe. If and when you come back from this block, try being a constructive user and stop pretending you're the Court Jester for the whole site. We already have some and they're far funnier than you. Graestan ( Talk ) 01:17, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Leave me alone. Graestan ( Talk ) 02:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You couldn't leave well enough alone, had to add ban evasion to the list, so now I'm giving you your stated wish of a permanent vacation. Goodbye. I'm sure I'm not alone in saying that I will miss your prolific GA writing. It didn't have to end this way. Graestan ( Talk ) 13:26, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Hey
Of course you're welcome to rejoin the project; you don't need my approval. Given that I wasn't personally involved in those long-ago disputes, I don't bear any hard feelings, and I look forward to working with you again in proper. :)  CC7567  (talk) 02:31, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

!
Welcome back, Kilson! Long time no chat. :)  JangFett  (Talk) 02:58, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Re: HoloNet
I honestly don't know which infobox would be best applicable; Media infobox might be of consideration, but other than that I have no idea. Also, I'll try to get to your GAN when I can, but I'm admittedly facing some seriously limited time on the Wook, so I can't promise anything.  CC7567  (talk) 05:54, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Re:Thanks
Hey Kilson, no need to thank me&mdash;Jaccoba was a great article already, all that needed fixing was one little technical thing. I wish I could have helped more with Onaconda Farr, but then he got killed and we don't know if all that other stuff happened now... so I kinda put him on a back burner :P But anyway, it's great to have you back and I'm excited to see what other articles you promote! Darth Trayus ( Trayus Academy ) 03:19, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

Reviews
We appreciate how much you're writing now that you're out of the hole, but could you do a little more reviewing as well? That's an area that's lagging quite a bit, and I see that you actually make critical objections so I am more than comfortable inviting you to do so. Graestan ( Talk ) 03:58, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

OOU (I pronounce it "Ooooooooooooh!")
Hey there! Definitely good ideas. I'll respond to them one-by-one.

Regarding a single "development" section, you're absolutely right in that there's not always enough info to justify two separate sections. If you check out here, you'll see that the proposed layout guide states: "If there is not enough information to justify two sections, Conception and Production can be merged into a section titled Development."

I think that character sections are important no matter the size of the story, as the proposed layout guide calls for them to have two separate paragraphs --- an OOU one as well as an IU one. As an example, Into the Great Unknown is a ten-page comic, but its Characters section is still able to provide some unique info. No matter the length of the story, the Plot summary should still be just that --- a summary, and the IU parts of the Characters section are a good opportunity to focus more on the individual actions of that specific character. Providing unique info isn't the only goal, either, as the character profiles are a good way to focus both OOU and IU info on one particular character. I think that it's important to keep things consistent across the board, and I don't think that the length of a story should be cause for exception to the rule. Where do you draw the line? At 22 pages? At 10? At 5? A lot of punch can be packed into even the shortest of stories. If a comic didn't have any characters at all, I doubt if anyone would object to the lack of a Characters section, but I'd advocate including ones on the Wampa and the probe droid for Hoth. Consistency is always good, as is minimizing the amount of exceptions.

That's a good point about the Cast section for things that do have casts. I'll probably add that after the Media section. Music articles like MasterFred's don't fall under the layout guide I'm proposing, as they're not "published narrative works," but the proposed layout guide does recommend using a generally similar layout (summary/description, development, reception, etc). What's important to keep in mind is that this proposed layout guide is only for things like novels, video games, comics, short stories, TV episodes, and films. But crap, I hadn't even considered a Cast section. Menkooroo 04:03, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi there! In the proposed layout guide, Appearances goes near the bottom of the article. That was something I picked up from previous OOU articles written by users such as Greyman and Sikon; better to keep it close to the bottom so as not to clutter tha article's main body. Kinda like in IU articles, which have the "Appearances" list at the bottom. Thoughts? Menkooroo 01:00, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

Neyo
Hey Kilson, nice to have you back with the Wook! Are you working on CC-8826's article? I was actually gonna work on that, but since you've done more work on it than me, I'll cede it to you. I will review it when you do nominate him.&mdash; 22:52, March 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * I do have it, though not on me. I'll do this tomorrow, and I guess you'll be good to go.&mdash; 23:01, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Triumphant
For those that you can access yourself, I can direct you to all of the online sources listed on the CC-3636 and Battle of Abregado articles. For those that may be harder to access: it appears in Star Wars: The Clone Wars: Meet Ahsoka Tano, Star Wars: The Clone Wars: Jedi Adventures, and Star Wars: The Clone Wars: Forces of Darkness, and it is referenced in and Star Wars: The Clone Wars Official Episode Guide Series 1 & 2. You additionally might want to check to see if it appears in the "Shadow of Malevolence" newsreel, as I don't have the episode with me right now. Hope that helps.  CC7567  (talk) 05:36, March 22, 2011 (UTC)

Re:
Yeah, no problem. Normally I hungrily gobble up the chance to review OOU noms, but I was holding off this time due to the fact that the correct layout is still being kicked around. I was worried about making a layout-related objection only to have my own objection declared invalid the next day or something. :P Buuuuut I think we're drawing close to something of a consensus in that senate hall thread, so it should be OK. I'm about to run out the door, and I probably won't be able to review it until tomorrow, but I will do it! Cheers. Menkooroo 04:01, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Kessel (0 ABY)

 * Hello, Kilson. It didn't dawn on me until I saw you make this latest change to your Battle of Kessel nom, but it seems we can specify a more exact date for that battle placement. We know canonically that the Rebels' evacuation of Yavin occurs in 0.5 ABY. So, if this Kessel battle takes place after that, I think it would be safe to go ahead and specify "c. 0.5 ABY" in the infobox and in the article itself. Though this would probably require a reference note explanation clarifying the 0.5 date from other source material. If it would be easier for you, I can add the reference note to the infobox, and then you can make any further changes to the article. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:29, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, refnote added. I answered your other question on my talk page. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:53, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

ConquerER-class atmospheric dreadnaught?
Hey Kilson! Just wanted to ask — is the comment next to the "CSWECite" template identifying the atmospheric dreadnaught as ConquerER-class a mistake or not?  Imperators II (Talk) 19:17, March 29, 2011 (UTC)