User talk:Dany36


 * Archive 1
 * Archive 2
 * Archive 3

No mention of Twilight Symphony ?
I was reading through the ZREO article and all seemed to be in order except for one thing, there was no mention of the group's newest effort Twilight Symphony, you can view the trailer at the site, I would make an article on it but writing is not where I shine, I prefer to edit and recommend to others that sections for things be added Roxas2080 16:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm...well, I'm not sure why you removed the part that you wrote about the Twilight Symphony... I'll add it back in if you don't mind, it was pretty good! :) Dany36 01:41, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Sure if you really think it was that good Roxas2080 01:44, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Sandbox
Sorry for bringing this unsolicited section, but can you look here, please? It's an experimental version of the Boomerang page where I show a better proposal of how the page could be improved. I also added some pieces of info, capitalized the word Boomerang (it isn't in the actual version) and obviously lacks the ex-featured thing because it's just a test. Thanks for your time, and reply me back (no pun intended =P). --K2L 03:28, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Will do! After I get patrolling, that is. XD I saw it earlier but I didn't have time to get on the computer until now. I'll make sure to look it after I take care of the patrol log. :) Dany36 03:29, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, no problem! Take your time =). --K2L 03:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * K, I just saw it. There are a few things here and there that need to be changed, such as the A Link to the Past link not being capitalized and italicized in the Typical Boomerangs section or the off-placed image of TP below the Gale Boomerang. I'm not sure I like the whole randomly-bolded words/sentences in the article. I know it's to sort of give the reader a better clue on how the boomerangs in each section work, but I think the message will get across by just placing it at the beginning of the section without bolding it. ;) Anyway, I'm not really too good at this whole reorganization thing...hopefully Cip will be able to give you more insight than me! XD Dany36 05:32, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The bolded parts came from the original article (notice that most of the original content is intact), but that can be fixed. The GB image can be either reduced of placed in, maybe, the Gallery section? Anyway, I can keep editing the sandbox to improve it (but not now, I need to sleep as it's already 1:18 am here in Venezuela =)). Feels good to know in advance what needs to be changed before aditing an actual article. --K2L 05:48, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm Odd
Any idea who the real culprit is behind the "bulbapedia" article deletion? PureLocke(User/Talk) 20:33, 10 August 2010 (EDT)
 * Nope. Probably someone with who was bored and had too much time on their hands trying to blame Bulbapedia for their boredom. :P Dany36 20:36, 10 August 2010 (EDT)
 * I was over at Wikirby earlier today and Axiomist was gearing up for vandalism protection back in April, apparently a person or persons were trying to get some friction going between the NIWA members. Some MO, "blame bulbapedia" probably not related though. PureLocke(User/Talk) 20:57, 10 August 2010 (EDT)
 * Hahaha, well, if this is their idea of "creating friction" between NIWA members, then it is pretty pathetic! It'll take more than that. Dany36 21:01, 10 August 2010 (EDT)

Link's Awakening Trading Sequence
Hey Dany. I've done some badly-needed editing on the Link's Awakening Trading Sequence article you flagged for improvement last month. I believe I've doctored it up enough to remove the template. Just thought I'd let you know in case you wanted to look over it and see if it meets your standards now.

Have a nice day! Hylian King 07:09, 29 August 2010 (EDT)
 * Sorry for the late reply, I've been pretty busy lately. I'll check it out this weekend. :) By the way, if you feel the article is now up to the wiki's standards, then feel free to remove the template yourself. You don't really need to ask for permission or anything. ;) See you around! Dany36 08:38, 2 September 2010 (EDT)

Minor request
You wouldn't mind moving this file to "Link_and_the_King_of_Red_Lions_Figurine_TWW.png", would you? I never knew "&" was an invalid character. I never got to thank you for swiftly removing all the images I marked for deletion. And for constantly giving praise. I'm sure you know how much the little ones appreciate it. ^_^ 08:12, 5 September 2010 (EDT)
 * Of course, no problem! Your images are REALLY awesome, and I don't think I ever thanked you for uploading those images that I requested...they are sooooo incredible and high-res. *-* Seriously! And as for moving that image name, I'll have to try and remember how to move a file with the "&" on it because somehow it won't let me...but it'll get done, no doubt. :P Thanks again for the images! :] Dany36 11:33, 5 September 2010 (EDT)


 * Thank you, that's perfect. And don't worry about it, I just try to do my best. If there's anything you need from me, don't hesitate to ask. Oort of curiosity, is there a way I can join the ZW public Skype chat? I've already added Mases, but we never really got to talk about it (or anything, really :P). I'd very much appreciate getting in ^_^ 05:38, 6 September 2010 (EDT)
 * Oh, sweet! Glad to hear that you want to join the chat. :) Right now I can't really use skype since I'm using the school's computer, but you can add Mandi, Matt, or Justin and they'll add you to the chat. They're one of our most active Skype users, so, yeah. See you there! Dany36 10:46, 6 September 2010 (EDT)

In Regards to the Green Potion
If all of the potions are on the same page, why do Red Potion and Blue Potion have their own pages? Pokemainiac 12:36, 29 October 2010 (EDT)
 * Ah! I forgot about those. I'm not sure what the decision was so that the Red and Blue Potion should have their own page, I was under the [wrong] impression that all of the potions had been placed in the same article. But I guess more can be said about the Red and Blue Potion than the Green Potion? Anyway, instead of just splitting articles, we usually have a discussion in the article's talk page whether that's the best option or not. That way we allow users to voice in their opinion, so feel free to start a talk page discussion about that. Dany36 12:39, 29 October 2010 (EDT)