User talk:DecafPotato

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Orphaned non-free image File:Pikmin 4 Logo.png[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Pikmin 4 Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pokedex links[edit]

Regarding [1], see WP:ELLIST and User talk:PrimeHunter#Link pokedex entries (I didn't hear more from Blaze Wolf). I added the Pokedex links to all nine generations but not List of Pokémon#List of species where I think they would be too much. For consistency they should either stay or go in all the generation lists. I think they are allowed, helpful and unintrusive there but if you disagree then we can seek wider input in a talk page discussion. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:35, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I never replied cause I didn't see a need to since I didn't have any reason to argue further since I agreed with you and was simply curious why you were doing it. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:04, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I do agree that we should use consistency (in all lists or in none), I just didn’t see the edits to the other lists. As for the addition of links, I feel like, because the hub at is linked through the citation, repeating those links feels unnecessary. DecafPotato (talk) 15:03, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The only link to after your edit was this:
"Gimmighoul — Pokémon Scarlet and Pokémon Violet | Official Website". Retrieved 2022-11-06.
Do you mean readers should use this to find the official site, then find (which isn't linked from that page), and then use the search box to find a Pokemon of interest? That seems like a lot of work when we can just link the Pokedex entry on the Pokedex number. It would be easier for readers if we at least linked in the external links section but they would still have to navigate to the bottom of the page, click there, and then find a way to a wanted Pokemon. If they try the "Load more Pokémon" button at then they have to extend the page around 70 times to reach generation IX. You cited WP:EL in the removal but did you read WP:ELLIST? PrimeHunter (talk) 18:46, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The way I interpret ELLIST, in cases where we can have a single external link to navigate to all items in a list, we should use that instead. And for the link to the general page, it should be either in an External links section or citation a la List of Pokémon in my opinion. And I don't think that the fact that a person has to scroll down to see all the Pokémon warrants the 100+ external links. DecafPotato (talk) 19:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
With Blaze Wolf now agreeing with the links and Paintspot reverting your edit, I guess the burden is on you if you want to start a wider discussion to seek consensus for removal. The links have been on nine articles for nine days with no other objections. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:59, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think Paintspot only reverted because I said I want consistency and they were on all other articles. But yeah, I think there's a decent consensus in favor of adding them. despite this, though, ELLIST is a guideline, and we should make sure that this implementation is covered by it. DecafPotato (talk) 16:38, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We don't have to tho. IT's simply a guideline. Guideline ≠ Policy. Guidelines are simply recommendations while policy tends to be seen as rules. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree we don't have to make sure of that but also, users often have different interpretations of guidelines and policies, and there is no authority who can declare what the "right" interpretation is. If we don't actually get the wording of the guideline changed then all we (meaning you at this point) could do is start a wider discussion to ask for more input, maybe with a notification at Wikipedia talk:External links. Even if there is consensus about the "right" general interpretation of a guideline, editors of specific articles can make a local consensus. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A cheeseburger for you![edit]

Cheeseburger.png Thanks for helping with the merging discussion on the Among Us chicken nugget!

- Derpytoucan (talk) 23:01, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]

Hello, DecafPotato. Thank you for your work on Agreement on the path to normalisation between Kosovo and Serbia. User:Onel5969, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Very nice job on this article. Keep up the good work.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Onel5969 TT me 14:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Arceus[edit]

Information icon Hello, DecafPotato. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Arceus, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:00, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]