User talk:En Passant

If you need anything, let me know!

Re: Article Clean-Up
I am glad to hear that you are planning on helping clean up the wiki! As far as I know, no one is really active right now. However, if we started making plans and implementing them, then other users would see the activity and likely join in. I suggest we begin working on topics covered in the new changes and see if other users join with us.

Well, all it takes is diligence to clean this place up. The new changes page makes it pretty easy to understand what you need to do. If we go ahead with this, I recommend that we start taking it chunk by chunk, ie, compile a list of all the Amphituber pages and then clean them up, then going on to Bulborbs, and so on. With this, the work will seem more manageable and a little less daunting.

Well, if I understand your question correctly, you don't have rights to edit certain pages. Well, if those show up just let me know and I'll deal with them as necessary. As for the project, I have set it up here. Unless you have any ideas of what we should start with, I propose we start with the Pikmin themselves.

What the page means is that you can't add content, but you can improve it. For example, there is difference between "It stomps and shoots fire and sometimes rolls." and "It most often stomps around the arena, using a thick, forward-facing jet of fire as its main attack. Occasionally, it will twitch and then initiate a rolling attack that can crush a great deal of Pikmin if you are not careful." You will notice that the basic idea stayed, it was just expressed in a larger, more interesting paragraph.

AdBeSop
Are you an admin, bureaucrat, or sypsop? Because I want to ask you that am I eligible for Bud?

I know that, but I need clearance from one of the three.

I'm also curious if I'm eligible for Master Flower or not.

Hello, Cheep has 3 archives and the req. said that you need a reasonably long talk archive and his 3 old archives are long.

Renaming
You could have asked me if you wanted your username changed, since I can change usernames. It would have moved all of your old edits to your new username, unless if you didn't want that and wanted a fresh start. If you do want me to get your old edits back, let me know and I'll see what I can do. 20:56, 1 June 2015 (EDT)

Unfortunately, it seems I can't rename Dry to Passant. I guess it won't let me rename a user to another user. I can rename Dry to any other unused name though; any suggestions? 21:21, 2 June 2015 (EDT)

I can't. 17:04, 3 June 2015 (EDT)

I would try to do that, but that would involve me renaming Dry to Passant, which I can't do, as we already established. (I don't understand why admins and 'crats don't have user account management abilities other than renaming...) So really, you've got three choices left: you can continue to use the Passant account (leaving behind your old edits), or abandon this account and continue using Dry (I thought you didn't like it, though), or I can rename Dry to some other name and you use that. Personally I'd go with the third choice, as you get your edits back. Believe me, I wish there was another choice, but I guess this is all we can do. 17:34, 3 June 2015 (EDT)

PAODS (Helping?)
Hi en passant. I wanted to know if i could have some help? Let me know on my talk page. Thank you. I mean my game. Could I have some help on Pikmin: Attack of DeathSpike. I need some help on the structure of it basically and would you possibly like to co-op on this game? Let me know, and also what is the cleanup project? One last thing. Am i good enough yet for leaf rank?

PARTNERS
do you wanna be full partners with me on Pikmin: Attack of DeathSpike?

Hello?
Quiet........

Not a lot of activity.......

Why.........

Where did everyone go?...

I am LoganPikmin and I approve of all SUMMERS! 16:36, 9 July 2015 (EDT)

Iridescent/Gilded Flint Beetle
There you go! I made two versions of each beetle just in case. The first of each has a relatively smooth shell, more closely resembling your drawing (although the first Flint Beetle has some evenly distributed chinks, like a real beetle's exoskeleton). The second version has ridges, to better define its elytra like the canon Iridescent Flint Beetle. I began them all with the Pikmin 2 model of the Iridescent Flint Beetle, and went from there! Thank you for this project, it gave me a good lesson in beetles' iridescence. I had to research quite a few references to get the look right (sorry that iridescence wins over the original color), but I finally discovered the secret to it and to the gold leaf look: dark, soft reflections. Really I'd say the colorless background reflection mattered more to this look than the gradient color.

Please let me know if there's anything you would like me to change; this was really fun! Scruffy 09:31, 28 July 2015 (EDT)

Ah, I see what you mean about the antennae and segmented bodies. Easily updated! But before I do, I was wondering if you would like the updated images to be in an isometric side view, like the view in your drawing, or if you just like the angled view the way it is. Scruffy 17:49, 28 July 2015 (EDT)

I just added the new isometric versions to the gallery! These new versions have segmented bodies, antennae that originate from their bodies, and non-luminescent eyes (I figured out that the light-bulb look on the Gilded Flint Beetle's eyes was actually simulated glare from the gold highlights). I modified the shape and leg positions a little to get it as close to the original drawings' positions as I could. If these are good, then the older versions can probably be put up for deletion; I don't want to clutter up the wiki with old versions of requests (I tried simply "uploading new versions", but that didn't really work out for the Gilded Flint Beetle). Anyway, thanks again for your suggestions! I'm looking forward to more of your enemy ideas! Scruffy 00:30, 29 July 2015 (EDT)

So, would you like an image of the initial body shape and leg positions in isometric view? That's easily updated, and you don't have to worry about it bugging me; I welcome your input on it! I don't mean to bug you with questions about it, I'm just trying to get it closest to the image you'd most prefer. Scruffy 00:14, 30 July 2015 (EDT)

There we go: the original body shape and legs that still have isometry, segmented bodies, and correct antennae. I'm sorry for the confusion; that was my fault. Thank you again for all your help and input with that, En Passant! Scruffy 03:16, 30 July 2015 (EDT)

Okay, here's the version with all legs attached to the thorax (that was my bad; I should've remembered that about arthropods!). Sorry it took me so many renders; I don't mean to clutter up your talk page. I hope these are closer to what you were imagining, thank you so much for your help. I'll be happy to help you with any more image renders or music you need! Scruffy 19:11, 30 July 2015 (EDT)

Hey There
Hey En Passant. How you doing? It sure has been awhile. Hey wanna talk about anything? Also one last thing. Do you think I have improved since last we met/ talked? Rate me on a scale of 1 to 10 of being a user and editing. 1 being the worst and 10 being amazing.

Template: Game
No problem! Always happy to help a fellow user.

Hey, uhhh... I'm assuming that you have more experience with things like infoboxes. I'm wondering because I want every page that "infobox enemy" is on to include Category:Enemies, except for the actual template's page. If you can do that, I'll be forever greatful. I'm categorizing tons of pages, and it would be a huge help.

Hey, alright! Thanks for doing that for me. Now I no longer need to put Category:Enemies under every article with Infobox Enemy in it.

Recent changes
I saw you moved over your Pikmin art to reflect the new name format I'm giving the images. Thanks for the help!

Apologies for not changing them all at once, I'm kind of all over the place renaming (most of them) and categorizing uncategorized images and other files, and I wanted to focus on the canonical images and icons until I finished them.

Re:Pikmin V Pikmin merging
Having the individual Pikmin types on their respective pages is not only better than having them all on a single, separate page but also provides more pages users may reach Pikmin V article from. Pikmin: Treacherous Treasures and Pikmin: Return to the Distant Planet both use a similar setup for its content pages, which are separate from the pages the content should be on, such as those respective game's Red Bulborb articles being separate from the general Red Bulborb article. I've been working on fixing that as well as I clean up the Pikmin Fanon. If you want to compare and contrast all the Pikmin types in Pikmin V in one article, you could list them out on the game's main page, like what I did on Pikmin: Wide World article. I know the canon Pikmin articles, at least the ones I haven't gotten to yet, aren't the prettiest-looking at the moment, but they'll be cleaned up in due time.


 * I explained my thoughts in my previous message. Also in my previous message are the answers to the questions you asked.


 * Wow, haven't touched upon this in a little. I guess I'll revise my point of view, so I suppose disregard anything discussed earlier. So, there's no issue with information existing in two places at once, even if it would be a detriment to the writer when having to update information. My criticism is that the Pikmin types in Pikmin V are on their own subpage rather than the game's main page, which is where Pikmin should be listed out. That being said, what is on the game's page should simply be a sample of that Pikmin's article or section, and that same sample section regarding that Pikmin should include main and link to the main article so the reader can, well, read more. I know it's dumb logic considering all of the Piklopedia and treasure and whatnot subpages on the wiki, but to be fair, those pages tend to be extremely long, and having them on a subpage would avoid bloating the game's article. Conversely, many games tend to involve only a small handful of Pikmin types.


 * Oh, that wasn't me that did that. I don't bother people to make pages not only because I'm not one to do that, but also because I have pages of my own that I have to make. And honestly, I'm not exactly happy with how I displayed the information about the Pikmin in Pikmin: Wide World on the game's page, but I suppose it'll do until I potentially rewrite that information or figure out a way to distribute it. Despite this, I think that it should be standard, considering so many other users have it that way for their games. Also, when you're editing a canon-related page, please don't delete the "in fanon games" section and the template that goes with it, and replace it with "in canon games" above the canon notes. You know just as well as anyone else that anything under the canon section is fan-made.


 * I understand that, I just happen to think it's a good way to lay out that information despite it involving the least effort. And eugh, you can say that again... So many pages and files need to be looked at yet...
 * Anyway, I think the "in fanon games" section is fine, and I've always thought that even since I first became a member of the wiki. Everything is fanon unless said otherwise, yes, but placing an "in canon games" header above, not only the canon notes, but a list of fanon games is extremely misleading. There have been times when I've wondered if the canon notes were necessary, but I figured I'd keep them to hint to newer members that they can also write their own notes in their game's sections, and also because they add flavor to the canon section and fill up space. Now, the canonical areas, caves, and Challenge Mode stages I've definitely decided to get rid of. I've kept them previously because I thought they would hint at the environments where such things could be found, but since they could be virtually anywhere a game creator wanted, that information was pointless. I'm even wondering if I should remove the canon carry weights and Poko values and related information for similar reasons. Oh, and I think the table of contents is fine. Well, except the note sections stuffing it up, which is an easy fix if it needs to be fixed.
 * The "in other games" section is not a matter of ownership in the slightest; it's a matter of who created the idea first judging by the dates of the edits that added the links or whose concept was initially at the top of an existing page. I understand entirely that you may have had the idea for the Pellet Poser floating around in your head, possibly even before Scruffy did his, for an immeasurable amount of time prior to your edit that added the Pellet Poser's link to the Piklopedia of Pikmin V. I'm just going by the edit dates. It could be considered unfair because there may be users in the past who have placed their game's section at the top of a page that was already in existence, moving the actual first section down, without anyone realizing it or correcting it, although I have not yet seen any instances of that. Perhaps you bring up a good point about the Green and Black and Orange Pikmin's pages having some sort of blurb at the top but the elemental recolors of enemies, or any other articles, not having one. Although, those Pikmins' articles are quite different from the rest, considering how they're split and all. I guess we'll see what the future holds. ...This discussion reminds me that I have to edit the Lila page.


 * You listed out plenty of good points that are worth digesting, especially about the "first" comments and the feedback on canon content. I suppose much of the information displayed in the canon section, both in the infobox and in the notes, isn't necessary at all. I would still like to retain the "appearances by game" galleries, though, because you never know when someone may want to use something's outdated appearance. My only problem involves the "in fanon games" and "user versions" sections, which I believe are absolutely necessary for an article's organization, and because some users make their own version of something that has no part in any game. The Orange and Green and Black Pikmin articles were split the way they were because there were so many different iterations of them.


 * I just explained the necessity of those sections in my previous message. And "appearances by game" isn't a header, it's the gallery used to show each of the canon appearances of an enemy by game, such as in the Fiery Blowhog article. I couldn't care less about chronological organization in fanon sections, as those and user versions will always be organized alphabetically. Understood about the canon generalities part. Also, I talked with Wraith last night about what you and I have been discussing, and he said that the small blurbs at the top of pages, which you earlier explained, would be a great addition to the wiki, and I agree. I'm just not sure how to go about it, though, concerning infoboxes I'd like to retain in the canon articles and the family categorizing in the other articles, because I'd like to avoid having a page being in two family categories.


 * The blurbs are a good idea, however I would prefer it if we kept the "appearances by game" section, as well as a general infobox at the top.
 * This is a conundrum. There are issues with enemy articles being in two family categories, but we want the users to have the freedom to make their own families as they'd like. So perhaps we should create a disambiguation page for any enemies that are significantly different and have different families. I like the disambiguation page that Green Pikmin has, for instance. But we need to be careful, lest we have 23 blue bulborb pages. There has to be a balance struck. What do you think Cheepy and En Passant, should we allow a page to be in two families to avoid the worst case scenario? Or is it too unrealistic that it would ever happen in the first place? 21:25, 20 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I would prefer we don't have any enemy or plant articles in more than one family article. It would confuse some people, and it would only become even more confusing when one enemy or plant is recorded in two family pages.


 * How would we avoid having too many versions of the same enemy? 21:31, 20 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Split the article as we did the Green, Orange, and Black Pikmin articles, I suppose.


 * I suck at explaining sometimes. But I do think the Pikmin 251-related articles I just processed look pretty nice, if you want to check them out. If you don't like it, you should choose one show me how you would want them to be laid out. I really don't know if there's any better way to organize them. And nevermind the family thing, I figured out a way to do it! ...Well, at the expense of needing to comb over hundreds of articles AGAIN to get them back into their family subcategories. I'm still unsure about having one enemy article be in two or more family categories and pages, though...


 * Yes, I understand, and that's shown me why the new layout is superior, as hesitant as I was to implement it initially. I suppose the "in fanon games" header, which I'm adamant continues to exist even on pages unrelated to canon content, could simply just be "in games", but eh, might as well specify the origin of the games those ideas are part of. The source of the confusion most likely lies in people often misunderstanding what I'm saying no matter how clear I think my words to be, something I'm used to and can't seem to prevent, but I'm not perfect either. And yes, I agree that the Pink Wollywog's entries should not be split.