FANDOM


m (Undo revision 57795 by Ranugad (talk))
m (Undo revision 57775 by Ranugad (talk))
Line 1: Line 1:
I think the biggest problem with this page is that we are dealing with three different castings now.
+
==card art==
   
Before you guys hacked it, I was gonna acutally split it up like some of the other pages had to be done when stuff was dramatically changed.
+
Please dont tell me we are going to start listing card variations under the casting versions, considering every single mainline car has multiple cards. [[User:Sinnin|Sinnin]] 06:26, April 18, 2010 (UTC)
  +
:Considering the casting was changed dramatically, with the turret being cast solid and the missile eliminated, THIS card variation is a little more than a run of the mill card art change and therefore, in my opinion, worthy of it's own version. And considering some card variations go high on the secondary market, justification for it's inclusion as a different version shouldn't have to be debated. That funny car on a card comes to mind. [[User:Ranugad|ranugad]] 13:05, April 18, 2010 (UTC)
  +
::I just see it as a gallery image or as a note, I dont see that as excluded, try and guess what version the loose one is. as for the funny car, well that was a super rare car, that got diluted 5 years later when it was re-released. so the only reason the card is worth so much is because its the only way to prove the car is a 1990 rather then a 1995 [[User:Sinnin|Sinnin]] 20:22, April 18, 2010 (UTC)
   
Raise your hand if you know about the two different rear end La Troca's, is it mentioned here? no, How bout south texas... uh uh. It's at HWC in Romero's lists though. And it was definitely recorder at the Station. And I bet it's in Zarnock's guide and sooner or later, Tomart's (long time between publication)
 
   
  +
:Go to [[Express Lane]] and tell me which year the base variation pictured in the gallery pertains to. And by your logic ANY and EVERY variation should be in the gallery with notes in the Notes section. I disagree, I think they should be listed in the Version section right where it needs to be when I go looking to see how many different ways my latest obsession came out before I discovered it's existence. If a wheel variation deserves it's own line, then card, color, tampo, etc deserves it's recognition as a different version. Are you going to be the head honcho who decides what level of difference between 2 releases qualifies for inclusion in the version table? In the future, I would appreciate any improvement you can make behind me, but denigrating my work by pushing what I, and other collectors consider variations, down to the gallery section feels like vandalism to me.
   
  +
[[User:Ranugad|ranugad]] 22:38, April 18, 2010 (UTC)
  +
:You'll have to excuse me I was under the impression you were sane, But apparently you are not. Did you just respond to a third person, because I didnt say any of that! I understand the importance of seperate line entries for each different casting variation. I do not see a casting variation here, all i see is a comparison photo. Maybe im stupid but the layout of the wiki is 1 line entry with a unique photo for each version. you have supplied a photo of two card variations, and added the photo as a single casting variation. I didnt start this debate on an opinion, I started it on the fact that detailed comparison photos belong in the gallery, as all aspects of the table pertain to details of the actual car. And in this case the cars are identical. [[User:Sinnin|Sinnin]] 10:26, April 19, 2010 (UTC)
  +
:
  +
:If it was just one person, I might ignore it, but when an administrator does it, I gotta ask, Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!! No wonder you chased of Air!!
  +
:And ya know what makes it even worse Kenny? This:
  +
::[[User_talk:Toughpigs#Request_For_Deletion|Request For Deletion]]
  +
::<blockquote>So Hailey put a delete tag on the page, but didn't leave you a message, which was rude and thoughtless. But -- Hailey isn't an admin on that wiki.</blockquote>
   
do we keep in strict year order, break up by casting, and if we do, what about when they go back, like they did with 69 custom chevy! Which I'm still missing many and the guide is short too.
+
:That was said by Danny to you in regards to your request to be deleted without a trace from the Beatle wiki, in case you forgot. Now it's my turn to respond to your rudeness. 1. You should have put Dave in his place with his offhand, rude and demeaning comments - you failed as an admin. 2. You rudely dismissed my work without so much as a comment in spite of my response.
   
[[User:Ranugad|ranugad]] 08:43, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
+
:So now it's my turn to give you a taste of your own medicine and ask you to delete all the pictures I uploaded and edits from the wiki without a trace. Bob [[User:Ranugad|ranugad]] 02:55, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
  +
::Pardon me, but I'm lost. Are you saying that it was I who chased off "Air" and was rude? I apologise for both things, but I don't know when I did it, how I did it or what I did. Sorry. Kenny [[User:HaarFager|HaarFager]] 04:27, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
  +
  +
:::It's no surprise you totally missed my point and avoided the real issue. Sidestepping befits you. It's amazing and now no suprise to me why the wiki is ignored by so many. [[User:Ranugad|ranugad]] 05:06, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
  +
::::Oh, I forgot, I did not intend to specifically mean you in regards to Air, I meant the plural you in the wiki.[[User:Ranugad|ranugad]] 05:12, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
  +
:::::I wasn't sidestepping anything, Bob, not intentionally. I merely want to reiterate my first sentence - "I'm lost." I'm not trying to accuse anybody of anything or make anybody mad. I am just trying to understand what you said or who said what. It's very confusing for me when lines run together and I can't figure out if something that was said was said by one user or another. That's why I think it's super critical that everybody uses the proper technique of when adding a comment, indent it by using one additional colon more than the comment above yours. I had a hard time figuring out what you were saying and when you were saying it. So, rather than try to make you mad at me for my simple not understanding what you said, let me just try to clarify what you said one point at a time so I can get it straight what you're saying or asking or accusing me of. What I think was your first point was this -
  +
:::::"If it was just one person, I might ignore it, but when an administrator does it, I gotta ask, Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!! No wonder you chased of Air!!"
  +
:::::When just one person or an administrator does it - Does what exactly?
  +
  +
::::::The more I think about this issue, it seems like you have issues with me. What are they exactly? What did I ever do to you? Explain them clearly, please. Kenny [[User:HaarFager|HaarFager]] 05:26, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
  +
:::::::If you want, you can e-mail me and we can talk easier. Just trying to be helpful. Kenny [[User:HaarFager|HaarFager]] 05:30, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
  +
  +
::::::::cheap words and shallow offers with no meaning. You've ignored my pm's at HWC and I have no idea what your email is and will not take this further past this comment. It's pretty simple, and since you can't seem to figure out out on your own, I'll spell it out.
  +
  +
::::::::Review the history of the invader's page and you willl see when I added the entry for the 2010 version. Then Sinnin relagated my image to a gallery shot, and left a snide remark. I responded with my position and added the line for the packaging variation. You come along and undo my work with no mention to the reason why. NOW you say it's because of some rule about having more than one picture when there are numerous cases of multiple pictures in that column by editors BEFORE me. And now you say it's because it's about the cars not the cards. I can site numerous examples, in Lee's, Tomarts, Warman's, and Zarnock's Ultimate guide to variations, where packaging difference is significant enough to be listed. Here's 2 off the top o my head.
  +
  +
::::::::2001-033 Fright Bike with Choking Hazard Printed and stickered.
  +
  +
::::::::2002 The Ford GT-90 is listed on a card with 238 or 240.
  +
  +
::::::::If you are going to quote and enforce rules, where are the rules? [[User:Ranugad|ranugad]] 12:38, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
  +
  +
:::::::::None of my words are cheap, so don't use that phrase again. And any offers I make are not shallow and are totally sincere. Why would I have mailed out program discs for free to different users on the Hot Wheels Wiki if I wasn't sincere? Now, that's straight and it won't ever be an issue again, right!? I have not ignored any pm's from you over on HWC. Throughout the whole time I've been on there, I have received only 3 pm's. One a few months back and 2 more within the last week or so - and I answered all 3. I haven't gotten any from you. I always answer every pm or e-mail that anybody sends me. So, I don't know what the problem is in your mind, but don't blame me for something I had no control over.
  +
:::::::::Like you, I agree, the Hot Wheels Wiki is pretty simple. But, apparently you can't see this or you'd know that I have spoken out many times in the past about only having one image per column. It's so simple, in fact, that at the top of every column it says "photo." That, in case you weren't aware of it, means "singular" and not "plural." Simple, eh? Another problem solved.
  +
:::::::::You seem to think that the Gallery is some kind of "black hole" for photographs that get relegated there. I think just the opposite, it's a special place. I have placed many of my own photos in Galleries for the simple fact that I'm not about to get into the habit of removing a perfectly good photo from a table just because my is better in quality. I went through that with Airland when he kept removing my pictures to replace mine with some of his own. As to my having made him leave the Hot Wheels Wiki, that is not true, either. The last thing he was doing on here was a project that him and I were working on and that was the [[Wheel Type]] page. We had a good system going there and then he left, so I don't know what happened. But, it wasn't anybody on here that made him leave, I'll wager that. It seems that he was be booted from HWC recently, so possibly he has a problem of his own that caught up with him. I don't know, but I wish him the best. I even invited him back to the Hot Wheels Wiki if he needed a place to satisfy his Hot Wheels picture taking urges. So, why would I do that if I wasn't "sincere?"
  +
:::::::::No, I didn't actually say "it's about the cars, not the cards." I was basically just repeating what the home page says. These words were not my own, so you can't really attribute them to me like you're doing. And as far as what other sites do or do not do, that's comparing apples to oranges and you know it has no place here. What they do is their own affair. What is done on the Hot Wheels Wiki is our own affair. When I was asked to be an administrator here on the Hot Wheels Wiki, I took that almost "sacred" task to heart and try to fulfill my duties to the best of my abilities. As far as your having been able to find examples that seem to prove your point, I can't fix everything. I'm only human. But, you knew that, right?
  +
:::::::::As far as rules are concerned, there aren't any real rules posted anywhere. None that I have been able to find. I had to learn the hard way, but now that I have, I use that knowledge to try to maintain a certain "standard" that seems to have been put in place before I joined. We can't have everything changed everytime a new user comes along and just decides to take it upon themselves to change something, even though we already have a precedent for it. True, it does say that anybody can add and change things, but this Wiki would not work if myself and others didn't try to maintain some kind of "standardization" to the way we do things around here.
  +
:::::::::I don't remember card art ever being something meant to be in tables before. And you'll remember recently how one user was putting statistics from the backs of cards at the top of casting pages? And how it was repositioned to the bottom of those same pages? That should have been clear enough for anybody as to exactly where anything to do with card art belonged here on the Hot Wheels Wiki. I apologise if you didn't figure this out, it wasn't an intentional slight toward you specifically.
  +
:::::::::Now that I have explained everything and spelled it out clearly for you to understand, there should be no more problems about it. Right? After reading this, you're probably even more mad at me, but it's my contention that you never had any reason to be mad at me in the first place so why should you get even more mad at me now? You just seem (to me), to have read this situation incorrectly and jumped to a few conclusions that I don't think were warranted, so I don't really think there is as big of a problem as you first thought there was. It's like I've said many times on here, to many different users. It's supposed to be fun, so if you want to add stuff here, please have fun with it. Lately, it's been hard for me to have much fun because I can't find any new cars and because of people that accuse me of things I didn't do. But, I perservere. Kenny [[User:HaarFager|HaarFager]] 22:02, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
  +
::::::::::I was just looking through the history of the Invader page, like you suggested, (see, I do listen), and can only find one single instance of David, (Sinnin), having made an edit to the page. But, I don't see any remarks he made, snide or otherwise. Perhaps you owe him an apology for this false accusation? Kenny [[User:HaarFager|HaarFager]] 22:19, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
  +
  +
:::::::::::Howly Macaroni! I really must be insane, call the boys in the white coats cause I cannot believe that what is so plain to see at the top of this page has to be pointed out. And as for the standard of one photo in the non-plural photo column - Am I gonna have to dig out pages, done by those who came before, where there are 2 photos in the non-plural photo column? Cause I can cite numerous, off the top of my head, the color changers. But will you even check my references? The fright bike is listed by both South Texas (The BEST online resource for hot wheels and will stay that way with the leadership you and the other mods are displaying at the moment, but let me get back to my point. Fright bike, in Zarnock's Ultimate (need I cite page and ISBN number? cause I can). But although both have it listed, neither has it pictured. Why can't we be better here and provide imagery of what is OBVIOUSLY something worth mentioning. So by my insane brain, I see MANY reasons to include the information and a corresponding picture RIGHT where one should expect it to be, in order of release! There, is that clear enough?[[User:Ranugad|ranugad]] 22:56, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
  +
  +
:::::::::::I got something to add too. I shouldn't be having to prove my case why it deserves listing as a variation in my mind. You should be explaining why it doesn't, and so far, I see more reasons to include than the vague and incorrect reasons you've and Dave have stated.[[User:Ranugad|ranugad]] 23:02, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
  +
  +
:::::::::::Forgive me an additional addition. I forgot to counterpoint your comment about the gallery section. There are pages with GROWING galleries. A few years from now, when another enthusiast looks to the wiki for info, he'll go to the Version Table first if he's looking for a list of how many ways it came out. When his eye reaches the year 2010, how clear will it be that there was a significant change in the card's artwork that corresponds with the same physical change the casting went through? And where will he have to look for imagery to say what pictures say better. In that Gallery that has 100's of Invaders that don't have firing missiles? I doubt it? I'm still working on drumming up a Tomart's to see if the grand uncle of HW's has any of the card variaitons I've mentioned before, which, I erred on the GT-90, it was the GT-40. And I got the numbers wrong, it was like 222 and 238, which was also the Saltflat Racers correct number. Does this to happen to every card switch over that occurs each year? No, it doesn't, so this should not be lumped into that category either. And I know that's more than one point so I'll stop, let you catch up and see if you've learned your lesson yet, or continue down this, what I consider, VERY unwikiable behavior - hence my other issue. [[User:Ranugad|ranugad]] 23:17, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
  +
::::::::::::Here is make take on this. Since the table is laid out for casting versions, it should be just for casting versions (each row equals a different version). With the card art, I feel it to be truly secondary since there are many many card art variations. I don't feel as though it should go unnoticed though. Card art should be noted in the "NOTES" section in the table of that particular version and if there is a pic, there should be instruction for the user to look to the photo gallery for the corresponding image. Lets try this out and lets put this thread behind us all, okay? [[User:BigBadBrad01|BigBadBrad01]] 00:25, May 3, 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:47, May 13, 2010

card art

Please dont tell me we are going to start listing card variations under the casting versions, considering every single mainline car has multiple cards. Sinnin 06:26, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Considering the casting was changed dramatically, with the turret being cast solid and the missile eliminated, THIS card variation is a little more than a run of the mill card art change and therefore, in my opinion, worthy of it's own version. And considering some card variations go high on the secondary market, justification for it's inclusion as a different version shouldn't have to be debated. That funny car on a card comes to mind. ranugad 13:05, April 18, 2010 (UTC)
I just see it as a gallery image or as a note, I dont see that as excluded, try and guess what version the loose one is. as for the funny car, well that was a super rare car, that got diluted 5 years later when it was re-released. so the only reason the card is worth so much is because its the only way to prove the car is a 1990 rather then a 1995 Sinnin 20:22, April 18, 2010 (UTC)


Go to Express Lane and tell me which year the base variation pictured in the gallery pertains to. And by your logic ANY and EVERY variation should be in the gallery with notes in the Notes section. I disagree, I think they should be listed in the Version section right where it needs to be when I go looking to see how many different ways my latest obsession came out before I discovered it's existence. If a wheel variation deserves it's own line, then card, color, tampo, etc deserves it's recognition as a different version. Are you going to be the head honcho who decides what level of difference between 2 releases qualifies for inclusion in the version table? In the future, I would appreciate any improvement you can make behind me, but denigrating my work by pushing what I, and other collectors consider variations, down to the gallery section feels like vandalism to me.

ranugad 22:38, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

You'll have to excuse me I was under the impression you were sane, But apparently you are not. Did you just respond to a third person, because I didnt say any of that! I understand the importance of seperate line entries for each different casting variation. I do not see a casting variation here, all i see is a comparison photo. Maybe im stupid but the layout of the wiki is 1 line entry with a unique photo for each version. you have supplied a photo of two card variations, and added the photo as a single casting variation. I didnt start this debate on an opinion, I started it on the fact that detailed comparison photos belong in the gallery, as all aspects of the table pertain to details of the actual car. And in this case the cars are identical. Sinnin 10:26, April 19, 2010 (UTC)
If it was just one person, I might ignore it, but when an administrator does it, I gotta ask, Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!! No wonder you chased of Air!!
And ya know what makes it even worse Kenny? This:
Request For Deletion
So Hailey put a delete tag on the page, but didn't leave you a message, which was rude and thoughtless. But -- Hailey isn't an admin on that wiki.
That was said by Danny to you in regards to your request to be deleted without a trace from the Beatle wiki, in case you forgot. Now it's my turn to respond to your rudeness. 1. You should have put Dave in his place with his offhand, rude and demeaning comments - you failed as an admin. 2. You rudely dismissed my work without so much as a comment in spite of my response.
So now it's my turn to give you a taste of your own medicine and ask you to delete all the pictures I uploaded and edits from the wiki without a trace. Bob ranugad 02:55, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
Pardon me, but I'm lost. Are you saying that it was I who chased off "Air" and was rude? I apologise for both things, but I don't know when I did it, how I did it or what I did. Sorry. Kenny HaarFager 04:27, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
It's no surprise you totally missed my point and avoided the real issue. Sidestepping befits you. It's amazing and now no suprise to me why the wiki is ignored by so many. ranugad 05:06, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
Oh, I forgot, I did not intend to specifically mean you in regards to Air, I meant the plural you in the wiki.ranugad 05:12, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
I wasn't sidestepping anything, Bob, not intentionally. I merely want to reiterate my first sentence - "I'm lost." I'm not trying to accuse anybody of anything or make anybody mad. I am just trying to understand what you said or who said what. It's very confusing for me when lines run together and I can't figure out if something that was said was said by one user or another. That's why I think it's super critical that everybody uses the proper technique of when adding a comment, indent it by using one additional colon more than the comment above yours. I had a hard time figuring out what you were saying and when you were saying it. So, rather than try to make you mad at me for my simple not understanding what you said, let me just try to clarify what you said one point at a time so I can get it straight what you're saying or asking or accusing me of. What I think was your first point was this -
"If it was just one person, I might ignore it, but when an administrator does it, I gotta ask, Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!! No wonder you chased of Air!!"
When just one person or an administrator does it - Does what exactly?
The more I think about this issue, it seems like you have issues with me. What are they exactly? What did I ever do to you? Explain them clearly, please. Kenny HaarFager 05:26, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
If you want, you can e-mail me and we can talk easier. Just trying to be helpful. Kenny HaarFager 05:30, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
cheap words and shallow offers with no meaning. You've ignored my pm's at HWC and I have no idea what your email is and will not take this further past this comment. It's pretty simple, and since you can't seem to figure out out on your own, I'll spell it out.
Review the history of the invader's page and you willl see when I added the entry for the 2010 version. Then Sinnin relagated my image to a gallery shot, and left a snide remark. I responded with my position and added the line for the packaging variation. You come along and undo my work with no mention to the reason why. NOW you say it's because of some rule about having more than one picture when there are numerous cases of multiple pictures in that column by editors BEFORE me. And now you say it's because it's about the cars not the cards. I can site numerous examples, in Lee's, Tomarts, Warman's, and Zarnock's Ultimate guide to variations, where packaging difference is significant enough to be listed. Here's 2 off the top o my head.
2001-033 Fright Bike with Choking Hazard Printed and stickered.
2002 The Ford GT-90 is listed on a card with 238 or 240.
If you are going to quote and enforce rules, where are the rules? ranugad 12:38, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
None of my words are cheap, so don't use that phrase again. And any offers I make are not shallow and are totally sincere. Why would I have mailed out program discs for free to different users on the Hot Wheels Wiki if I wasn't sincere? Now, that's straight and it won't ever be an issue again, right!? I have not ignored any pm's from you over on HWC. Throughout the whole time I've been on there, I have received only 3 pm's. One a few months back and 2 more within the last week or so - and I answered all 3. I haven't gotten any from you. I always answer every pm or e-mail that anybody sends me. So, I don't know what the problem is in your mind, but don't blame me for something I had no control over.
Like you, I agree, the Hot Wheels Wiki is pretty simple. But, apparently you can't see this or you'd know that I have spoken out many times in the past about only having one image per column. It's so simple, in fact, that at the top of every column it says "photo." That, in case you weren't aware of it, means "singular" and not "plural." Simple, eh? Another problem solved.
You seem to think that the Gallery is some kind of "black hole" for photographs that get relegated there. I think just the opposite, it's a special place. I have placed many of my own photos in Galleries for the simple fact that I'm not about to get into the habit of removing a perfectly good photo from a table just because my is better in quality. I went through that with Airland when he kept removing my pictures to replace mine with some of his own. As to my having made him leave the Hot Wheels Wiki, that is not true, either. The last thing he was doing on here was a project that him and I were working on and that was the Wheel Type page. We had a good system going there and then he left, so I don't know what happened. But, it wasn't anybody on here that made him leave, I'll wager that. It seems that he was be booted from HWC recently, so possibly he has a problem of his own that caught up with him. I don't know, but I wish him the best. I even invited him back to the Hot Wheels Wiki if he needed a place to satisfy his Hot Wheels picture taking urges. So, why would I do that if I wasn't "sincere?"
No, I didn't actually say "it's about the cars, not the cards." I was basically just repeating what the home page says. These words were not my own, so you can't really attribute them to me like you're doing. And as far as what other sites do or do not do, that's comparing apples to oranges and you know it has no place here. What they do is their own affair. What is done on the Hot Wheels Wiki is our own affair. When I was asked to be an administrator here on the Hot Wheels Wiki, I took that almost "sacred" task to heart and try to fulfill my duties to the best of my abilities. As far as your having been able to find examples that seem to prove your point, I can't fix everything. I'm only human. But, you knew that, right?
As far as rules are concerned, there aren't any real rules posted anywhere. None that I have been able to find. I had to learn the hard way, but now that I have, I use that knowledge to try to maintain a certain "standard" that seems to have been put in place before I joined. We can't have everything changed everytime a new user comes along and just decides to take it upon themselves to change something, even though we already have a precedent for it. True, it does say that anybody can add and change things, but this Wiki would not work if myself and others didn't try to maintain some kind of "standardization" to the way we do things around here.
I don't remember card art ever being something meant to be in tables before. And you'll remember recently how one user was putting statistics from the backs of cards at the top of casting pages? And how it was repositioned to the bottom of those same pages? That should have been clear enough for anybody as to exactly where anything to do with card art belonged here on the Hot Wheels Wiki. I apologise if you didn't figure this out, it wasn't an intentional slight toward you specifically.
Now that I have explained everything and spelled it out clearly for you to understand, there should be no more problems about it. Right? After reading this, you're probably even more mad at me, but it's my contention that you never had any reason to be mad at me in the first place so why should you get even more mad at me now? You just seem (to me), to have read this situation incorrectly and jumped to a few conclusions that I don't think were warranted, so I don't really think there is as big of a problem as you first thought there was. It's like I've said many times on here, to many different users. It's supposed to be fun, so if you want to add stuff here, please have fun with it. Lately, it's been hard for me to have much fun because I can't find any new cars and because of people that accuse me of things I didn't do. But, I perservere. Kenny HaarFager 22:02, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
I was just looking through the history of the Invader page, like you suggested, (see, I do listen), and can only find one single instance of David, (Sinnin), having made an edit to the page. But, I don't see any remarks he made, snide or otherwise. Perhaps you owe him an apology for this false accusation? Kenny HaarFager 22:19, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
Howly Macaroni! I really must be insane, call the boys in the white coats cause I cannot believe that what is so plain to see at the top of this page has to be pointed out. And as for the standard of one photo in the non-plural photo column - Am I gonna have to dig out pages, done by those who came before, where there are 2 photos in the non-plural photo column? Cause I can cite numerous, off the top of my head, the color changers. But will you even check my references? The fright bike is listed by both South Texas (The BEST online resource for hot wheels and will stay that way with the leadership you and the other mods are displaying at the moment, but let me get back to my point. Fright bike, in Zarnock's Ultimate (need I cite page and ISBN number? cause I can). But although both have it listed, neither has it pictured. Why can't we be better here and provide imagery of what is OBVIOUSLY something worth mentioning. So by my insane brain, I see MANY reasons to include the information and a corresponding picture RIGHT where one should expect it to be, in order of release! There, is that clear enough?ranugad 22:56, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
I got something to add too. I shouldn't be having to prove my case why it deserves listing as a variation in my mind. You should be explaining why it doesn't, and so far, I see more reasons to include than the vague and incorrect reasons you've and Dave have stated.ranugad 23:02, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
Forgive me an additional addition. I forgot to counterpoint your comment about the gallery section. There are pages with GROWING galleries. A few years from now, when another enthusiast looks to the wiki for info, he'll go to the Version Table first if he's looking for a list of how many ways it came out. When his eye reaches the year 2010, how clear will it be that there was a significant change in the card's artwork that corresponds with the same physical change the casting went through? And where will he have to look for imagery to say what pictures say better. In that Gallery that has 100's of Invaders that don't have firing missiles? I doubt it? I'm still working on drumming up a Tomart's to see if the grand uncle of HW's has any of the card variaitons I've mentioned before, which, I erred on the GT-90, it was the GT-40. And I got the numbers wrong, it was like 222 and 238, which was also the Saltflat Racers correct number. Does this to happen to every card switch over that occurs each year? No, it doesn't, so this should not be lumped into that category either. And I know that's more than one point so I'll stop, let you catch up and see if you've learned your lesson yet, or continue down this, what I consider, VERY unwikiable behavior - hence my other issue. ranugad 23:17, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
Here is make take on this. Since the table is laid out for casting versions, it should be just for casting versions (each row equals a different version). With the card art, I feel it to be truly secondary since there are many many card art variations. I don't feel as though it should go unnoticed though. Card art should be noted in the "NOTES" section in the table of that particular version and if there is a pic, there should be instruction for the user to look to the photo gallery for the corresponding image. Lets try this out and lets put this thread behind us all, okay? BigBadBrad01 00:25, May 3, 2010 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.