Proserpine

Buffy edits

Hello, Prosperpine. Thanks for all your contributions to the Buffy articles, you have a keen eye. However, I do question the "Created by" and "Last appearances" edits you've made recently. Are the writers of episodes which introduce characters really their creators, especially in a show like Buffy where Joss reigns such tight creative control? Surely "introduced by" is not the same thing as created by. (For example, no one cites Stephen Moffat as having created Jack Harkness, who is Russell T Davies' creation.) If we start counting the introducing writers, why aren't we counting the directors and the original actors as similar players in the "contruction" of the character? Anyway, my point it, it's largely unnecessary: the first appearance section links to the episode where they first appeared (and thus, the relevant production factors) without the OR and assumption it would require to cite Matt Kiene and Joe Reinkemeyer as having created Oz.

The other thing is the "last appearance" section, a left-over from time on Wikipedia when these articles were constructed around fannish tidbits and not real-world perspectives which make them of a better quality. As fictional characters never really have final appearances, the general consensus is they're best left blank for modern characters whose franchises are still open. Especially now for Buffy and Angel where canonical continuations always leave it open for Oz or Cordelia for example to return again. The importance of these later appearances gets mentioned in the prose of the article, as should the final televised appearances (for example, "You're Welcome" and After the Fall in the case of Cordy). With these characters, the "last appearance" field is only a "most recent appearance" field. Do you get what I mean? I'd like to hear your thoughts. Thanks!

Oh, and re: your username, have you read The Garden of Proserpine? ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 17:44, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Swinburne's an interesting one. You should read TS Eliot's article on Swinburne if you haven't already.

As for the infobox thing: you're right. But alas, the television medium is a more tricky than the comic book one, we'd agree. Character creation really is an organic process from writer-artist with comics, but is it so with executive producer-episode writer? Would episode writer-episode director not be the closest approximate to the comic book model of character creation? With Buffy, Willow and say, Dawn - we KNOW that they are created by Joss Whedon. We KNOW that David Greenwalt *and* Joss Whedon created Doyle. However, with Lorne, Groo and Anya, we don't - this is why it's best not to mention the creator at all, because to do so would be our own inference (original research). Infoboxes need not be (allow me to Wildean) tirelessly subordinate to accuracy - they are best kept brief, pretty, and short. Clutter looks horrible, which is a greater sin than not specifying the exact mechanics of Lorne's empathic powers.

Details can flourish and be explored in the prose, where it would be atrocious not to spell out that "Chosen" is where Anya last appeared. In fact, it would be just the same not to point out that was Faith's last portrayal (to the knowledge of many) on-screen. However, the definitiveness of it is questionable need we bring in the pedantry of her being in Season Eight too, and then perhaps appearing in a role-playing game here or a video game there should one be deemed canonical. So, I took the liberty of removing the "last appearance" field from the infobox because I think (looking through the edit histories of three other Buffy contributors with good histories) there would be consensus for that. We can ask on the WikiProject if you'd like to know this more with certainty. If you look at these fine Buffy articles: Wesley Wyndam-Pryce and Faith (Buffy the Vampire Slayer), a mix of inline references and prose mentions illustrate the character's final and most recent appearances with sufficient economy.

How do you feel about all of this? Get back to me.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 20:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you about the Cordy article. I really want to get the Willow and Illyria ones up to shape next. And Riley, only having a handful of appearances and a lot of reception press (mostly negative), is a good candidate for a GA article. It would be great to work together on one. We are in agreement on the creator then - it is indeed OR to assume Joss Whedon's creatorship on every single character, yes. This is why I propose in cases where creatorship is ambiguous, the space be left blank. The remaining examples could all do with citations (for example, characters like Dawn and Fred who might not at first glance appear to be Joss' brainchildren.)~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 21:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Proserpine. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:KetoAltar.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:KetoAltar.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Template:PD-art does not apply to photographs of three-dimensional art. Error (talk) 20:56, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

File:KetoAltar.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:KetoAltar.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Error (talk) 21:23, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

File source problem with File:KetoAltar.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:KetoAltar.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)