User talk:Alex95

Re: Arms/Tentacles
In cephalopods, "tentacle" refers solely to the paired long appendages on squid that have a leaf-shaped area with spikes or suction cups on the ends of a long, cupless line. "Arm" refers to the shorter, triangular appendages with suction cups covering the entire bottom side that all cephalopods have. Octopuses have 8 arms and 0 tentacles, and squid have 8 or 10 arms, depending on exact species, and 2 tentacles. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 01:31, 11 April 2018 (EDT)

MVDK Last Two Expert Levels
I saw you were having a little trouble with the last two expert levels in Mario vs. Donkey Kong. I don't own the game myself, but did you complete the first ten expert levels (collect all presents and beat all high scores)? If not, perhaps that might be the reason they weren't unlocked. 00:53, 13 April 2018 (EDT)
 * Yeah, I haven't beaten any of the Expert levels yet, so that may be it. I'm dumb and forgot there were Presents in those levels, so collecting all Presents could still be a requirement. Doesn't look like there are any high scores to beat, though, so that's good! 11:09, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

Grrrols
Grrrols and Thwomps are strikingly similar when placed side-by-side..... Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:40, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

Level images
I don't think the level selection screenshots are better. I expressly chose screenshots that encapsulate the basic elements and atmosphere of their worlds; the screenshot on the right, for example, has hanging chains, lava, and flame-throwing Shy Guys, just what's highly representative for Fire Mountain and gives the player a direct idea about it. Besides, the level menus look repetitive to me, and the article really should show more of the game itself. I hope you understand. -- 15:42, 14 April 2018 (EDT)
 * I'll let you do it, but if you had a certain idea in mind, let me know! -- 15:52, 14 April 2018 (EDT)

Re: TPP formatting
I knew I copied the TPP formatting correctly! The template was just missing a vital part,. Could you update Proposals (and any relevant pages) with a guide as follows (with  tags:)

[enter the proposal title here]
[describe what issue this proposal is about and what changes you think should be made to improve how the wiki handles that issue]

Proposer: Deadline: [insert a deadline here, 7 days after the proposal was created (14 for writing guidelines and talk page proposals), at 23:59 GMT, in the format: "August 8, 2011, 23:59 GMT"]

Support

 * 1) [make a statement indicating that you support your proposal]

Comments
--The  Retro   Gamer  01:01, 16 April 2018 (EDT)


 * Also, why are all the times in GMT? Isn't EDT the wiki default? --The   Retro   Gamer  01:03, 16 April 2018 (EDT)


 * It says to add, but the easy-to-use boilerplate should also include it. Why should it require needless typing?  --The   Retro   Gamer  01:25, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Rocky Wrench
Why can a sea slug be derived from a bat and an alien octopus be derived from a shiitake it looks nothing like, but a mole cannot be derived from the turtle/mole that now seems to be just mole that it was named after and that came before it? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:31, 17 April 2018 (EDT)
 * Who knows. 14:21, 17 April 2018 (EDT)
 * The point is if it works for all of them, it should work here too, otherwise there's arbitrariness going on. As Link-The-Lefty pointed out, Choropoo seems to mean "Poo that darts around" (as stupid as that sounds in English...) Hence, it is named to be a specific variation of Poo, and variations of previous things are, by definition, derivative. Hence, Monty Mole is derivative of Rocky Wrench, according to official nomenclature, and saying otherwise is defying said official nomenclature. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:20, 17 April 2018 (EDT)
 * I've rebutted your expanded response, which hilariously enough seems to have used my own words . Anyways, your response still seems to hinge on "derived" being biological, which it is not. It means "based upon." The designers were pretty obviously going for a variant thereof, a thing that players would connect to a thing they'd seen before, as the name doesn't just hint, but ultimately proves beyond any doubt at all. The name Choropoo is basically "Scuttling Rocky Wrench." And the current infobox layout says that "Rocky Wrench" was initially based off of the "Scuttling Rocky Wrench" which came three years later, which makes no sense whatsoever. EDIT: And I see you responded. As have I, as have I. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:09, 17 April 2018 (EDT)
 * I agree that there is definitely some confliction of information here, or lack of information altogether, but I don't believe a proposal was the right course of action here without any real definitive proof to back the claim. As I said, the Japanese name is a start, but I don't think it is enough to solidify anything. If there is an official bio somewhere, Japanese or English or otherwise, then that would be enough. 22:14, 17 April 2018 (EDT)
 * I'd say there's about as much as Buzzy Beetle and Magmus. One's a turtle, the other's some sort of rock thing (that appears to have eight feet, take that SMW Spike Top!) that has a Japanese name that says it's a Buzzy. They also tend to be listed together, like on that Japanese SM3DL .pdf, where Choropoo, Goropoo, and Poo were all listed together (with Poo additionally being away from the main Kame on the list, Nokonoko). Then there's the fact that they share models in all recent 3D games featuring both... Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:21, 17 April 2018 (EDT)
 * Do you have a link to the Japanese 3D Land pdf? That might be something to look into. 22:23, 17 April 2018 (EDT)
 * I've posted it a few times. I misremembered something too: Rocky is fairly well distanced from five Koopas, which are on the opposite page; Spiny is the only "close" one. Anyways, I've checked, and the word "Choropoo" never comes up in Poo's description, so it's probably not a variant of it...anyways, here it is again: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:26, 17 April 2018 (EDT)
 * So Mario jc translated it for me (because I suck at Japanese :P) and yeah, the two don't reference each other. The names are similar, as are the appearances of the two, but I would still prefer some kind of official statement between the relations. 22:59, 17 April 2018 (EDT)
 * Y'all might be askin' a tad much, there. Pretty sure there's no official statement regarding this enemy's relation to this one, this one, or this one, but it's pretty obviously there. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:14, 17 April 2018 (EDT)
 * The major reason why I'm asking for an official statement is because of Rocky Wrench's redesign, making it now resemble a Monty Mole. It may share a name and design now, but that wasn't always the case. I'm looking, but I'm not finding a statement, so until one is provided or I find one on my own, we're at an impasse. 23:19, 17 April 2018 (EDT)
 * from the get-go. And certainly moreso than Goomba snd Galoomba, they weren't even shaped or colored the same. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:22, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

Birthday
I know this isn't a question, but I was looking at your userbox and noticed your birthday is today, so Happy Birthday! Sincerely,
 * My birthday was actually nineteen days ago, but thanks anyway! :) 18:27, 22 April 2018 (EDT)

No problem! :)

Please protect this page!
Thanks! 17:44, 24 April 2018 (EDT)
 * Done. 17:53, 24 April 2018 (EDT)

My permission
I give permission to use the images from my site. Because I can not put the images here.

ChristopherPAraujo (talk) 14:51, 25 April 2018 (EDT)
 * (Wow that's a lot of green and yellow) Okay, if I can find anything we don't have, I'll add it :) 13:55, 25 April 2018 (EDT)

Can't get balloon blast in nabbit mission
When I completed the mission ,the toad said something about a poetry book and didn't give me the Bros attack! Please help Alex95! Wariopig (talk) 15:56, 25 April 2018 (EDT) Wariopig
 * I haven't played Paper Jam, sorry. I don't know anything more than what the Balloon Blast and Nabbit pages say. 15:59, 25 April 2018 (EDT)

Congratulations!!!
Hi I haven't been here in a long time but I see that you made it to sysop! Congratulations!!! :D :D :D --Luigifan312 (talk) 21:43, 26 April 2018 (EDT)
 * Thanks! 21:44, 26 April 2018 (EDT)

Re: Userspace
Okay, you got me there. Rules are rules, and I missed that one. Quoting directly from the rules is not nitpicking at all, and it would be ridiculous of me to suggest that.

But before you go ahead and delete the subpages, I would like to point out a few things. I have also notified Steve, since he is the authority on what I am discussing.


 * 1) Creating new pages has barely any overhead, especially considering that Mediawiki stores every previous revision of a page. Based on the export XML, creating a new page only has the additional fields,  , and   (but there are probably a few others.)
 * 2) Database memory is not being saved by deleting pages. The page is still saved in the database, and can be restored at any time. Of course, you could always pursue permanent deletion if you really wanted to save memory, but this is not a standard handling procedure for normal page deletion.
 * 3) And perhaps most importantly, this particular rule was added as a minor edit without any discussion that I can find. I do not think the ramifications of this particular rule were carefully considered.

The main things the user page rules are trying to be prevented are spam and using userpages as a personal repository for non Mariowiki-related things. The only reason I can think of for this rule is a fear of userspace rules evasion through overflow with an extremely large number of pages. But that's what patrollers are for: edits by non-trusted users are specifically reviewed to ensure rules aren't broken.

If there's no other problems arising from this, then it's just a difference in personal preference. While I could put everything on my main user page ( very easily ), I want the edit history of sections to be individually preserved in a cohesive way. I see no reason to dilute these edits into one stream if there's little overhead from creating new pages. --The  Retro   Gamer  21:29, 27 April 2018 (EDT)


 * My main contention is that you haven't really given a clear reason for the rule. If there's an admin forum board, you should ask there if you can quote from it regarding this rule.


 * The only explanation you've really added to the discussion is "It's to prevent several pages that serve no purpose to the wiki other than personal records." But carried to its logical extreme, that would mean every previous revision of everyone's userpage should be deleted, since they "serve no purpose to the wiki other than personal records". It's not that I have any huge problem with this rule, but I feel like you're not addressing my actual point, which can be distilled down to what's the difference between page revisions and new pages? Presumably it's a maintenance issue of some kind?


 * Also, I mentioned Porplemontage to ensure I was speaking accurately about page overhead. --The   Retro   Gamer  22:48, 27 April 2018 (EDT)
 * Ah, so the real goal is to decrease the number of userpage edits, or rather to ensure that a user is generally productive on the wiki rather than obseessed with their userspace. But I disagree with this pure edit number bean counting. The problem is, table formatting can be a a tricky thing, and many edits are necessary to ensure the tables are properly tested and tweaked to perfection. Of course, the templates are a whole other issue, and perhaps they do not contribute towards the final vision of the page, but it all has a content (presentational) oriented goal in mind. I could balance my edit count out by fixing grammar on many random pages, but I'm currently pursuing how to best present the DKC information. --The   Retro   Gamer  23:36, 27 April 2018 (EDT)
 * Allow me to clarify: CSS table formatting can be tricky. The original wikitable CSS is ridiculously element specific (making it difficult to override inline), and instead of replacing it, I tried to supplement and override it with . I have now corrected that mistep, though more tweaking is needed for optimal control. Also, see my most recent comment to User talk:Porplemontage (though you probably already saw it in Special:RecentChanges).  --The   Retro   Gamer  23:53, 27 April 2018 (EDT)
 * We're kind of in an awkward position here. I would prefer to keep the user subpages, the rules are against. Obviously, you have the full authority to delete them at any point, but it seems the lack of discussion resolution would make that a bit awkward.


 * I think it would be useful to discuss this further:

You are allowed to have a userpage so editors, and sometimes readers, can get to know you better. But the excessiveness of user subpages that could very easily just be included on your main userpage is just largely, and I know I've used this a lot recently, unnecessary. The main reason is that userspace edits are supposed to come second to mainspace edits. Having your personal lists and information on one page can help reduce the number of edits you make to your userspace; having them each on separate pages would increase those edits. So, yeah, it would be a maintenance reason, to keep edits of userspace pages to a minimum.


 * One issue I think needs further discussion is the notion of edit counts. Edit counts are in some ways a worthless metric because they don't tell one the substance or context of those edits. One can always encourage less edits, but that doesn't mean that strategy will be the most productive way to edit. My ultimate goal when editing is not to minimize the number of edits, but to minimize the amount of time I spend editing any particular thing. In many cases, reducing the number of edits will reduce the amount of time, but sometimes many edits are necessary to quickly preview a change, particularly to preview CSS: CSS output can't be seen without saving the change to the CSS and going to another page. Generally also, I think the management of userspace edits beyond what is deemed actively harmful or sufficiently off-topic is a dangerous direction to go with the rules. Because you're not really encouraging more productivity by doing this, you're just throwing a monkey wrench into my flow.


 * I also think you should avoid the "I don't see a reason" and "unnecessary" arguments, because they seem to suggest your opinion of how to manage my userspace should have greater weight than my own. I do see a reason. Saying something is unnecessary isn't a strong argument for not doing something. I do not think continuing to bring those arguments will further the discussion.


 * Basically I guess my argument boils down to: If I find the subpages useful (or think it may have potential to be useful), and it's not harmful to the wiki, what's the problem with allowing me to manage them in the way I want? I think this will come down to the definition of "harmful", though. --The   Retro   Gamer  19:14, 28 April 2018 (EDT)


 * Preference and rules are 2 separate areas: I have made my preference clear, but in this power relationship, I am a user and the rules have already been established, so obviously they will have precedence. Disagreeing with a rule doesn't mean I won't follow it.


 * I'm not ignoring the rules. Nowhere in the rules does it says a user must nominate their own pages for deletion if they're in violation of the rules. It is up to your discretion whether to delete or delay deletion, since you are the active admin involved in this issue. --The   Retro   Gamer  19:50, 28 April 2018 (EDT)


 * You have not slacked; you made a earlier judgement call not to delete immediately. This had its benefits and downsides: as a benefit, we were able to delve further into the rationales for the rule, which was useful for me. Perhaps a better approach would been an initially firm message telling me you would delete the subpages soon (and then deleting them after I acknowledged the message), but still being open to discussion.


 * As you have said, the more proper procedure to formally dispute rules is proposals, not talk pages (though talk page discussions can help to clarify). I have no problem with rules, I do personally prefer to understand the reasons for the rules, but that does not change your job to enforce the rules as an admin. I'm sorry if this has been disruptive; I had no intention of disruption if it was. There are no hard feelings. --The   Retro   Gamer  21:28, 28 April 2018 (EDT)

Merging page histories?
You have the ability to merge page histories, right? I was wondering if User:The Retro Gamer/dktable sandbox could have its old history merged with User:The Retro Gamer/sandbox. --The  Retro   Gamer  22:29, 28 April 2018 (EDT)
 * Honestly not sure, as I've never done that before. But I'll ask the others, see if they tell me if that's possible or not. 22:31, 28 April 2018 (EDT)
 * I think it's Special:MergeHistory, and then you choose which edits from the previous page to merge... but I would also recommend asking the others in case there's some kind of downside (though I don't imagine there is, but it's always good to ask first.) --The   Retro   Gamer  22:36, 28 April 2018 (EDT)
 * Well, I found the special page. Looks like I'm the first to use it :D Check to see if everything you wanted moved over. 22:37, 28 April 2018 (EDT)
 * Thanks! --The   Retro   Gamer  22:43, 28 April 2018 (EDT)
 * You're welcome! I'll go ahead and delete the dksandbox page, then. 22:44, 28 April 2018 (EDT)

Merging
Wow, you really are the first admin to do a history merge! I actually have a request of my own: Mind attempting to merge all revisions up to 2 August 2008 of Bow to Lady Bow? Thanks! 22:46, 28 April 2018 (EDT)
 * Um, probably shouldn't go crazy with this. User page histories are one thing, but I don't think article histories should be merged with. There's likely a reason why this hasn't been used before, I think I jumped the gun here :P 22:50, 28 April 2018 (EDT)
 * ...Fair. 22:52, 28 April 2018 (EDT)