User talk:UrsusArctos

Grammar note

Ursus, I've noticed that you always seem to capitalize the first word in a clause within parentheses. For example,

The term "Angel" is rather varied, referring at various times to all human beings in the expanded definition of the term (This includes Seeds of Life, Adam's progeny and mankind).

Just FYI, this isn't grammatically correct (in any version of English that I'm aware of), so I've been needing to fix these every time I see them. I just thought I'd let you know as a self-preventative measure. --Reichu 07:52, 2 May 2009 (PDT)

Character name order

In Episode 13 you accidentally referred to "Rei" as "Ayanami Rei". According to EvaWiki's EvaWiki:Standards and Conventions, characters are referred to using the westernized version of their names, hence "Rei Ayanami". --V 04:13, 5 August 2007 (EDT)

Also, "Angel" has to be universally spelled with a capital A, and a lot of times you've been spelled it "angel" so far. --V 04:54, 5 August 2007 (EDT)

My bad about Ayanami Rei and angel, I was doing a lot of typing and didn't have the time to be entirely thorough. Thanks for spotting those, anyway.

No problem. You can sign your name by typing --~~~~. Always sign your name on Talk pages, but never sign your name on actual articles. Btw.....what time zone do you live in? I mean it's 5 AM here but I am insane and just working on this all night. --V 05:20, 5 August 2007 (EDT)

Ach...I've got to remember that. I'm in GMT +5:30, or India time, makes it 3:00 in the afternoon here, on Sunday. --UrsusArctos 05:30, 5 August 2007 (EDT)

I added a 4th title line so 2 titles will no longer have to share the same line. I'll re-do the pages. Though V or OMF will have to tweak the info box. One title is off-line. --thewayneiac Aug. 15, 2007 22:53 EDT.

I want you to hold off on finishing up more episode synopsis write-ups for a little while, we've got some more noobies coming in and its an easy task I want to start them off on. --V 11:23, 16 August 2007 (EDT)

Image files

Thanks for loading the image files for Ramiel. I don't think the png files display right; the jpg files you loaded are working better. Need a generic pic of Ramiel for its infobox: the one used now has its energy-beam just about to fire; I think it would be better to find a pic of it not firing, as the flash in the still shot is a bit confusing. We might combine several shots of the firing sequence together to make a gif file, like we did for Zeruel's accordion arms. --V 08:30, 3 November 2007 (PDT)

Right, I'll see if I can get another one of Ramiel...will one of him flying over those telephone poles do, if I can't get another good one? I'll be back in a jiffy...--UrsusArctos 08:33, 3 November 2007 (PDT)

Individual Angel Personalities

I hadn't been planning on doing that for each Angel. Just for Armisael (Kaworu is a whole 'nother situation), then I realized Zeruel has something of a personality as well. Then for Sachiel I just wanted to point out "it reacts with puzzlement to humans attacking it as if it conceptually didn't understand this at first". I only wanted to do this for the exceptional one or two Angels who actually have a "personality". I.e. Shamshel and Ramiel are mindless, essentially, and the "battle" section covers this as well; I want to remove that from their articles. --V 08:17, 14 December 2007 (PST)

You do have a distinctive bias when it comes to the Angel mind, IMO. A lot of what you've written reeks of NPOV anthropocentristic-- Well, you get the idea. I'll eventually be taking a hard switch to all of it if no one else does. --Reichu 12:56, 16 December 2007 (PST)

Really? What's wrong with it. I was actually trying to emphasis that most *aren't* anthropomorphized but like Armisael and maybe Zeruel are exceptions, but most aren't really emotional. --V 13:26, 16 December 2007 (PST)

Excellent work

Just wanted to say your work on the project has been excellent; you're a walking example of what I consider a "good Evapedia editor" to be; would that I had 10 UrsusArtoses, I could take over the world (btw, there wouldn't happen to actually be 9 more of you? :) --V 11:15, 29 December 2007 (PST)

Redirects are a bad thing

I didn't explain this before sorry: the idea is that redirects are a bad thing. They exist mostly so that people typing things in a search bar will be redirected to a correct page. One of the lonely, thankless tasks of Teh Admins is to one by one, correct every redirect into a direct link. It's something along the lines of too many redirects eventually slows the site down, but really its just a matter of cleanliness. You don't need to worry about this at all: just please don't change "[[Evangelion Unit-01|Eva-01]]" to "[[Eva-01]]": both get displayed as just "Eva-01" so that makes no difference, and its actually supposed to be a direct link to the exact title. This is something you don't really have to worry about its grunt work that I will handle. --V 20:45, 14 January 2008 (PST)

"Fading away"?

Why in the world are you "fading away"?--V 07:27, 20 January 2008 (PST)

Stub Removal

Do you want me to remove any unnecessary stubs on pages that wouldn't require a stub? Or do you want me to leave as that? --Bee-Zerk 21:12 19 February 2008 (AEST)

You're most welcome! In fact, you're doing a great job with the spell correcting! Keep it up, Bee-Zerk! --UrsusArctos 02:15, 19 February 2008 (PST)

Holy...

Jesus Christ, man, how many hours do ya go on this site? I've just checked the Recent Changes and you've...just gone crazy! And buy that I mean, AWESOME! GREAT WORK URSUS! :D --Bee-Zerk 10:50, 23 February 2008 (AEST)

It was a long free period I had, and I edited like I'd never done in a long time. Many of those changes are minor, and the rest of the "crazy period" was because I got sysop status and went on deleting a whole lot of junk. --UrsusArctos 16:19, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Also, when you edited the Berserk page, I didn't see much of a change. Can you tell me the changes? Just curious! ;) --Bee-Zerk, 18:28, 23 February, 2008 (AEST)

You need to go back on the edits and compare mine to the last one (Ornette's) and you'll see what I did. Basically, restored a much older version of the page because the present one was messy. --UrsusArctos 15:46, 23 February 2008 (PST)

What I find...

Ironic is that during any discussion between the Sukhoi Flankers and the Lockheed Raptors; the Flanker fans will say that the Flanker RULZ all. And then the Raptor fans argue otherwise - Vice versa, But when someone says they're both "formidable" opponents, no one listens or argues with the neutral side... --Bee-Zerk 21:07, 25 April, 2008 (AEST)

Oh, yeah. Lulz. In any case, the best place to prove a fighter is in combat-which neither of the two have been exposed to.--UrsusArctos 17:40, 25 April 2008 (PDT)

Collapsible Tables

This link has basic instructions. Essentially, you just need to add the class "collapsible" to the table, and it should gain the show/hide feature.

{| class="wikitable collapsible"
! Simple collapsible table
|-
| Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
|}

Simple collapsible table
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet

Add the collapsed class to make the table hidden by default.

{| class="wikitable collapsible collapsed"
! Simple collapsible table
|-
| Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
|}

Simple collapsible table
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet

If you want to prettify the tables, that's going to take some css. To begin with, you can just specify style manually. I can come up with final design code at some stage.ObsessiveMathsFreak 19:18, 27 November 2009 (PST)

About the new templates

The deed has been done --Yeomans (talk) 22:05, 27 January 2014 (EST)

Sounds good to me. I'll grab a pic of it asap --Yeomans (talk) 13:10, 29 January 2014 (EST)

Thanks

Thank you for the User page, but can I suggest you also give one to (User:Bhorium)? He has been pretty active throughout the years too and I like many of his edits. FelipeFritschF (talk) 21:50, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello again. Can you take a look at the permissions for the Theory and Analysis:What Is Canon? page? I was looking to improve it for a while (I currently have a very partial draft in my user page), but I am unable to edit it myself. Reichu also tried to see if I was lacking any permissions but she couldn't find out what was wrong. I did ask her to create a new page to replace that one if necessary, but I think it'd be best if I could just increment the old one. Thanks. FelipeFritschF (talk) 23:53, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Thanks, I'll see if it works, but I'm not making any actual edits until it's all done and I get someone to review the whole thing. Don't wanna risk messing this up as it's quite a complicated subject.

I am on the Wikia/Fandom wiki indeed. Admin there has in fact given me rollback privileges. Seemingly he likes my edits so much that he wants to make me a mod eventually. It's mostly vandalism reversal, removing some huge assumptions, adding images etc. Ironically, despite the fact that it's open (which is why you get some poor edits by random anonymous users over the years), that wiki isn't actually more active or complete overall than ours and from what I could gather from some brief look at the stats and my own personal experience, it's not even more widely read.

You're probably aware that Fandom as a company has this model of supporting "free" wikis (which then indirectly monetize) which have come into competition with several older wikis of the same subject, including ours. Reichu has mentioned to me more than once about the content they've (legally, yes) inserted there from here which still forms the majority of the wiki. At least they do have the EvaWiki header and credit it amply. Apparently those, like the parts from Wikipedia, were supposed to be used as templates until the articles were rewritten but even after 10 years that hasn't happened for the majority of articles - I imagine as a result both of the primacy of our wiki and EGF as a whole and the comparative lack of activity and dedicated contributors that means for the Fandom wiki. Nonetheless I'd still rather have both wikis free from misinformation even if this one is still my focus.

Yes, Reichu has asked me the same. I did already add some crediting in the pages I did edit (namely the Shinji page). If you have any pages in particular you can think of I can also add the header on those. FelipeFritschF (talk) 02:42, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

The whole reason we made the article - you can ask Reichu if you want as this is yet another article that was discussed with people in 2019 - was to address the supposed "originality" and "faithfulness" of the ADV script and how actually Netflix butchered the show, or so the narrative went. It's about ADV, so I don't understand why you'd want to remove the now much reduced mention to AWL, with Kanemitsu's response to correct it. Her claims spread like wildfire, but Kanemitsu's correction didn't. Shouldn't it be noted here? I have made tons of edits addressing the problems ADV introduced to analyzing the show in different articles, so I am of course well aware of when to quote them or not. FelipeFritschF (talk) 04:27, 18 June 2021 (UTC)