|Archive 1||September 9, 2010 - October 14, 2011|
|Archive 2||October 22, 2011 - May 17, 2012|
|Archive 3||May 25, 2012 - July 2, 2012|
are you sure you don't want the tags? it makes it easier, some youtubers are modders so i wanted to point those out. sgnerf is a blog and modder, that's why i put the tag so people don't get confused.
do you think we can implement a similar homepage as the Pokemon wikia?
Nerfmaster8 03:22, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
i think we should keep the current layout for nerfers, its organized enough. no need to cram it into a single page. i don't recommend you deleting the pages as people will get mad.
we should add speculation as a section to article layout, people can't help themselves. another idea is a forum to let them talk about rumors.
i see that someone keeps adding tactics to blaster articles, those are very useful. instead of simply deleting them, we should move them to a new page: blaster tactics. do you think that is a good idea or not?
you should make a "sandbox" for nerf wiki.
by the way, you forgot to completely remove n-force from the review standards
sorry for getting a bit off topic
Nerfmaster8 04:21, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
well i did mention 2 ideas, either a separate section from the article information (bottom) or just create a forum for people to chat at. it doesn't really matter that much anyways.
Nerfmaster8 04:31, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
another quiet release: nerf n-strike elite stockadeEdit
A search on toys r us brought me the following result: the stockade will be released on 8.1.12. This is surprising but the blaster is NOT found on Hasbro's website, the catelog has also been removed (requires username & password). The strange thing is that ipr (nerfnation) has not mentioned this blaster at all, i wonder what is going on here. we have stock images and now this...not sure if this is considered an official confirm, just toys r us website. i found this on nerf mods & review's chat.
you should remove weight and dimensions, those are almost always blank. its a waste of space. i do get why you have it there.
Nerfmaster8 01:31, July 4, 2012 (UTC)
praxis and stockadeEdit
are you sure that is a leak? i do know that urban taggers posted on the vortex sonic series, no official announcement.
as for the stockade, do you want to keep it as unreleased product or go back to rumor? i posted on nerfnation and nerf removed the post, this makes things even more interesting along with the fact that elite blasters are in stores (retaliator). still unsure about stockade, do as you wish.
we really need a new template for things similar to this: unconfirmed released product. this is giving me a headache along with others on nerfnation, dart tag and vortex products have been completely ignored. nerf is now trying to hide the fact that another elite product is showing up and covering it up as well. people are asking about the other product but don't get a response.
sample text : this product has been released into stores but has not been confirmed by Hasbro or nerfnation. This blaster may have been quietly released into stores.
another template is fake product
sample text: this product may be a fake, even though stock images have been leaked out. no official announcement or confirm by Hasbro or nerfnation.
Nerfmaster8 04:58, July 5, 2012 (UTC)
nerf does like to release products under the radar, they did it for the jolt and now the snapfire8+pyragon. i am still unsure about the stockade.
the templates are just ideas to combat the rumored feel of the blasters. i just don't know what to list them as anymore. GG insists its unreleased, while i still have a bit of doubt. like i said nerf deleted my post, don't understand the purpose of that. i am going to say this "Gage seems to want to add rumors as they are technically confirmed", not to label him or anything but the way how he is editing gives me that feel. not crtiticizing him, he makes me feel unsure and doubtful.
Nerfmaster8 05:10, July 5, 2012 (UTC)
if you do make the unconfirmed template, we need to add it to a whole bunch of products: vendetta, pyragon+snapfire8 (technically confirmed-indirect), stockade. there are probably more, these are the current blasters.
Nerfmaster8 05:15, July 5, 2012 (UTC)
vendetta was found on the wrong series, dart tag/n-strike. don't remember which one or if they fixed it. snapfire 8 was shown off at the toy fair and pyragon at the invester presentation, not sure if that counts as a confirm or not. label the blasters as you wish, i am going to parallel my wiki with this one. my wiki will serve as a more official wiki for dart blasters since this one is based off the community, this will help people catch up on recent news. some of the information may be the same or similar, information is public knowledge and i made a backup while i fixed up the articles here.
i suggest replacing the news template with a did you know that people can edit. news would be more useful as a full page, but if you feel that is too messy that is fine too. i already created one on my wiki, all the way back to 2010.
Nerfmaster8 05:29, July 5, 2012 (UTC)
i didn't say that news will be lost, just somewhere else. comunity places: news, review, modification, polls
Nerfmaster8 05:57, July 5, 2012 (UTC)
so you don't mind if i partner my wiki up, unofficially?
Nerfmaster8 05:58, July 5, 2012 (UTC)
well you can leave a link on the home page or maybe create a scroll bar for news. The current news isn't enough, it allows for people to add speculation without checking because they are lazy. if all the news was there, not just the most recent it would end the problem.
i am creating an Official Dart blaster encyclopedia. this will be based off official and confirmed information, like you said "this is based off the community". i think that an official wiki partnered up with the community version will be better since nerf wiki's community doesn't want it to become "official". benefits: community based articles and official information, colaberation of intelligence. i have also created an idea for review, modification and rumors; rather than having separate pages this allows for people to talk. GG said to let people talk, i don't think talking on the talk page or the blaster article itself is a good idea. i have a better idea, create a forum for this. if there is one, then link up. sorry if my requirements are a bit high, i just want people to start using nerf wiki as a reference but that isn't going to happen anytime soon. this is similar to bulbapedia, its an official wiki not a community one. people may look up nerf wiki or nerfipedia for information right now, but that could change if an official wiki is launched.
Nerfmaster8 00:38, July 6, 2012 (UTC)
for the news template, take a look at the Pokemon wikia. Its not clustered at all, they even archived older news. The template works so that recent is first and you can scroll down.
as for official, that means based on confirmed information. any unconfirmed are labeled as such. this does not require an endorsement from Hasbro, but if they want to later they can. as for now, my wiki is locked-its just starting up. i will unlock it if people don't spam or vandalize after everything is set up. bulbapedia just temporarily locked the wiki due to released products, i will be following suit but only for released products not locking the entire wiki.
also for the people who think that this is a blog, you may want to remind GG that as well.
as for the forum, that idea was for review, modification and rumor purposes so that pages on the wiki won't be needed. if you feel like it looks good, then keep. i don't feel that way.
on the pokemon wiki, there are many features that are good such as the forum, Q & A (FAQ), pokemon of month, trainer of month, villian of month, location of month, scrolling news, did you know. along with the portals to the different generation pokemon lists. i am planning to create something similar to that, i am going to credit them for the ideas.
for my wiki, i have created 3 news pages: nerf, off brand and wiki news. this unclogs the system.
as for the references, i haven't seen any on youtube or the community blogs. would you like to provide a few examples of existing references to nerf wiki articles?
Nerfmaster8 01:12, July 6, 2012 (UTC)
they had the idea first, so its better to give credit where its due.
as for GG, i am not sure that i would trust him with the new product series. i would rather you add the information or control those pages. since we are not sure 100%, it should still be marked as a rumor.you even said yourelf that you're unsure and yet you let him. no one has seen the actual product anywhere, just stock images. i am aware of the toys r us link, i found it. the chat member gave me the idea to search elite, he did not find the stockade release date.
as for the official feel of this wiki, that is really going to depend on how well the merge is completed. if the homepage is better than current and looks much nicer then i may come back. i also have a few pages that are useful that i created but you probably don't want them here: legal disclaimer, official sources.
i think i understand why GG made his own wiki, its more a of a blog than articles-not to insult but that's what i feel when i read the articles. its more of a blog post, no organization. i also don't want to get into arguments with him on whether or not something is confirmed. now if the stockade and jolt are quietly released, they should be marked as such. we should not ad speculation as to what we think, so what if toys r us has the stockade. no other website has it listed. another point, IPR has not responded to any of my posts regarding the stockade. i am not tring to bakseat moderate here, just pointing out the obvious. if GG has a problem with this post, he should go take a look at the articles rather than argue over the articles. the product count should be based more off official than unconfirmed blasters.
Nerfmaster8 01:41, July 6, 2012 (UTC)
Tactical light Edit
Sorry, forgot to log in. Solowing106 17:25, July 6, 2012 (UTC)
I'd say it is most likely discontinued, as it was only sold in a value pack of the Barrel Break and in the Mission Kit (which only saw a short production run, as far as I can tell).
Oh, and how hard is it to log in? Most browsers will keep you logged in unless you specifically log out of Wikia. It's annoying to see so many unsigned posts!!!!
estimated weight & dimensionsEdit
do you want me to add the information for elite rampage? its from target-shipping weight.
did you delete the buzz bee page, that i marked?
Nerfmaster8 01:29, July 12, 2012 (UTC)
new photo upload?Edit
What happened to the uploading page for images? did wikia upgrade it? i can't seem to upload any images.
nerf wiki forumEdit
didn't notice there was a forum for nerf wiki before. this could be useful. this means that the product reviews, modification and rumor/speculation talk could be moved over here. no need for sub-pages.
we need to work on this section. forum and rules should be moved to the home page, not hidden in help. sorry for pointing out the errors.
trivia and pyragon question Edit
for trivia, i see a lot of media references in the trivia not labeled. its not that it should be labeled, i don't even feel like it belongs under trivia at all. trivia is for unique things about the blaster, like a mini Did You Know section. if you would rather give it a new section, that's fine with me. that information isn't all that necessary, what i mean is eventually there will be so much that it takes up more than the actual article.
as for the pyragon drum, it seems like reloading the pyragon kind of requires adding the drum's mechanism. its not as simple like before to just load in 40 disks, its after you load in 10 disks; you have to slide the red knob. there are 4 inner chambers that each hold 10 disks. this conflicts with the drum article.
this brings me to a conclusion, do we really need those clip/magazine pages? we could just list those and put the incredibally important information into the blaster articles, it still belongs under reloading. without some of the information, the reloading section doesn't seem complete.
sorry for the massive amounts of messages.
i just added a link to the drum, it doesn't really disrupt the text. since its a special drum and the information is needed to reload, i added the link.
so your saying that the forum is for help only? thats kind of strange since i see 3 discussion categories, we could change 2 of them. i mean the general discussion would be for blasters, rumors & speculation while we could change the other 2discussions categories to review or modding if needed. i mean those are all blank so it would do anything for right now. if we move moddification and reviews to sub pages then there will be a lot of recent activity that doesn't cover blasters. would those subpages disrupt recent activity? that's my main concern, if it does disrupt then we need a different method.
this makes me a bit hesitant to add the off brand articles since even without them, there would a at least double the number of pages now. not sure if we can keep up on the poor edits people make.
as for the simplified rules, why was that hidden under help?
sorry for bothering you at the comic con. you can answer when you get back home, its fine with me.
Nerfmaster8 14:14, July 14, 2012 (UTC)
Super Soaker colorsEdit
If you get a chance, please look at my comment on the talk page for the Super Soaker page. Lots of people are calling the dark color on the current Super Soaker line "black" when it is very clearly a dark blue. There are a few pages where it is correctly called blue, but the majority of the pages for the guns call it black, which is wrong.
Hello JetCell. In regarding to the NDTL page. On that page you write “The NDTL was formed in 2008 and is continuing strong to this day”. I don’t think it is continuing any more. I went to the Nerf NDTL promotion page at http://ndtl.makeitvivid.com and doesn’t have current info on the page. Is the NDTL continuing strong?
Hello, I am Abce2, head of the Bakugan Wiki. I was wondering if you'd like to join TaG. TaG is a collaboration of Toy and Game Wikis. If you have any questions, feel free to check out http://officialtag.wikia.com/wiki/TaG_Wiki
- Hello, I am just checking to see if you got this message. There's been a lot of glitches my side, so I'm just checking up. Abce2|Talk "Other" 02:07, July 19, 2012 (UTC)
merging dart blaster encyclopediaEdit
would you mind if i moved the articles and set up pages over from dart blaster encyclopedia? such as official sources, warning (basic ground rules with changes to the simplified rules), forum categories (product review, general discussion, modification) and other articles. also without basic ground rules which is what we have currently (allows anyone to edit, good or poor), is not a good policy. the rules that i have added may seems a bit harsh against spammers, trolls and vandals but they do deserve it. i also reworded the default simplifed rules. the forum should be used not just for the help desk, the help desk should be one of the multiple categories. no reason that the forum should be wasted on just help, should be made more useful. moving those sections of the blaster articles would prevent doubling the number of articles that would appear in recent activity, allows for chatting without disrupting the wiki in general. they have their space and others can read/fix articles. i have created a few info boxes with some changes that should be brought over.
in my opinion, product reviews should stay on store websites. if someone wants to know the review by customers, they check the customer reviews-that's why it was created for the store website and should not be placed on a wiki. i don't see any other wiki besides a nerf wiki having that on the wiki.
i feel like this needs to be done rather not because otherwise adding in the off brand articles would put the wiki over 1,000 articles total with the subpages (modification, product reviews). the way how i set up my wiki basically fixes the majority of problems on nerf wiki. if you want to keep the news template at 4 bulletins, a solution would be to link it to a full page of news. if you do want to merge, i can move everything over for you; all you would need to do is add in the links to the homepage when needed. Please do take a look at the wiki before you make a decision.
as for the rules, i just updated them compared to the default simplified rules. if you don't know where those are, you have hidden them away in the help section of nerf wiki. i just took their rules and made a few changes. those rules are not meant to scare off people, just to provide some basic ground rules similar to bulbapedia to encourage people to make good edits compared to poor edits. the majority of the warning is simply the default simplified rules which i have reworded. i have added a little bit concerning vandels/spammers and arguments. if there is something that you think in my rules that needs changing, please tell me. the simplified rules is quite strange, some are repeats and others contradict the point of the rules.
as for counter productive edits, compared to wikipedia and bulbapdia; i am like the only one looking up and adding missing details to pages. wikipedia and bulbapedia have a lot more than one person checking stuff. i really don't want to fall back to locking articles but we really need a lot more people checking details. i think this will be fixed by adding a full page for news. i have a system in place for it. default is nerf, linked to off brand and then community messages is the wiki news. this prevents clogging and keeps it organized.
as for the info box templates, we can add in rate of fire and more accurate ranges. in addition since series is not in the page title, we should add that in along with firing modes. if you want to keep type rather than changing the name to firing modes, that's fine. i have a bunch of pages that i want to added, some are not on the homepage.
as for reviews, originally i had the stand of completely removing it. to compromise, i have decided to simply move that stuff to the forum. its the same concept as moving it to a subpage, this method just prevents clogging up the recent activity. once we move modification (hacking/cheating in video games) and reviews (customer reviews) to sub pages, people will be editing those even more than blaster articles; that means we need to make those edits not appear in the recent activity. that was my opinion in my last message, i do not plan on deleting reviews. if the review template can be placed on the forum topic, then we don't need the subpages.
if you don't mind the changes, could you first move the forum and simplified rules to the homepage? also could you unlock the article standards and layouts at a later time? i want to make a few changes to them and then combine them into a guideline similar to the other wikis. i will change the layouts and standards once i am have finished the guideline on my wiki, i will tell you when to i am ready to move it over. as for the news, could you leave those pages unlocked for me? i follow nerfnation pretty closely. i looked up how to do the forum, it works on my wiki. its just a simple copy over. the only problem i face is some things are locked down, so i would need you to either unlock them or add the links yourself when needed.
Nerfmaster8 16:38, July 17, 2012 (UTC)
let's go through the pages on the wiki that i created and see if we can come to an agreement of what can be moved over. i have made a few changes to the current pages, now if there is anything in particular that you want changed, please let me know.
pages i am planning to bring over:
- guidelines: still working on this (article standards, layout and rules)
rules are similar to the default rules, just reworded with argument and vadel policy.
- official sources
- warning/rules (tell me if you want anything else changed).
- Did you know
- FAQ, Q & A is not needed-all questions are posted on nerfnation
- pages listed under "other": nerf terminology, Title page Abbreviations
- news: 2 pages (defaults ot nerf, links to community messages and off brand news. all 3 are separate. community messages is for wiki news.
- forum: help desk is kept, 3 new categories: general discussion (water cooler), product reviw, modification
subpages are basically chatting zones, forum is for chatting. let's just move those pages over to the forum. no need to clog the recent activities.
why do you think that the other pages are not needed? some of those pages, we don't even have or need to be cleaned up.
so you don't mind moving the product reviews and modification to the forum?
well the FAQ and Did you know could be combined into a page if you really wanted to. earlier when i asked you about terminology +did you know, you said yes to the ideas. i actually never made the pages until now on my own wiki.
page title Abbreviations would effectively eliminate the massive amounts of not needed disambiguation templates-they could easily be fixed by adding the series to the name. adding a bit more to the title isn't going to kill anyone that is reading.
guidelines and rules would be 2 separate pages. the warning would be brought over with any changes that you wish to make while the guidelines would be a combination of official sources, article layout & standards. i was hoping to put official sources on the homepage on its own, so people would actually notice it more. as for the rules and guidelines, wikia said to create your own custom one for your topic; that's what i did or am planning to do.
if you can manage to hide the subpages from recent activity, then i won't bug you on moving it to the forum.
even though i have clarified, you probably won't agree to the majority of these changes. you would rather keep the wiki the way it is but that won't improve the wiki by that much.
i said just put the series in the title, brand doesn't.not everyone goes to nerf wiki to search something, they put it in google and find it. the series is to eliminate the disambiguation pages that are not necessary.
its only a small amount of did you know right now, when more users edit and add more it will grow.
even if i wanted to improve the other pages, you have locked them...
i want to update the article standards and layout pages. updating (adding a few things) + merging my wiki's pages. i plan to combine standards and layouts into a guideline. official sources really should be its own page, but if you insists on cramming it into the guideline; that's fine with me. it just won't be as useful.
as for modification and product review, would you like to take a poll next month regarding if the community still wants this on the article page or wouldn't mind having it moved to the forum? this is why i have different pages on my wiki, a full page for polls and news. its more effective.
i think we need 2 more templates. one for unconfirmed released product (i made one on my wiki) and a accessory compatiblity.
it seems like Pokemon wiki moved all their trivia to the did you know template, i realized this because the first time i went there; there was relatively little did you know. after a while it grew in size.
as for the FAQ, there is nothing there at the moment. if something really important pops up, i may add to it. the terminology page is to distingush and relieve confusion on how nerf messed up the actual gun parts in the instructions.
as a last request, would you move the forum and simplified rules from the help section to the homepage? also, you seemed to have delete N-Force from the homepage as well, was that to make room for elite? you should put it back in.
I don't understand how the WJRLucasBrothers don't qualify as famous Nerfers. CaCox97 has a page, as well as a couple other guys. You should check out their videos.
HuggerMan95 04:26, July 18, 2012 (UTC) Dawg95
Tactical Laser Sight?Edit
Just found this on eBay. Any idea what the hell it is? I can't seem to find it here on the wiki - http://www.ebay.com/itm/NERF-N-STRIKE-Green-Tactical-Laser-Sight-/200793954310?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2ec0409806#ht_500wt_1413
could you take a look at the "official sources" and trivia section? the article layout and standards will be copied over my version, but these will be added. the rumor plan will also be updated. i want to make sure that all the pages that will be moved won't need to be changed besides minor grammar. i plan on linking the bloggers to their nerfer page. i know that you and gg don't want nerfers but just leave the stuff there alone, it belongs there. also could you delete the simplified rules page and move the forum to the homepage?
when we move the news, guidelines and rules over, could you leave those unlocked? i feel like there may be changes i want to do in the future.
not sure if you got my last response, but why do we need the reviews for the upcoming unreleased blasters? can't we wait for the official release?
Shot Blast/Tornado Strike shoulder stockEdit
Please look over my comments on the Shot Blast stock's talk page and let me know what you think.
few more improvementsEdit
adding a page for polls and leaving the news pages unlocked. i also updated the guidelines.
re: Shot Blast/Tornado Strike shoulder stockEdit
I merged the articles and marked the old Tornado Strike stock page for deletion. I THINK I updated all of the pages that linked to them, but please look it over to see if I missed any of them.
Thanks for correcting my edits. I wasn't aware of the issue with a "/" in the title of the page. Looks good either way. I just really saw no point in there being two different pages for an accessory that is physically identical other than the color, especially when the "new" color was also used with the original Soaker as well.
On another note, but along the same lines, I personally don't see a reason that the original (non-Elite) Firestrike and the Night Finder EX-3 shouldn't get the same treatment, since they are physically identical as well, other than the color. But I guess that would open a whole can of worms with the various colored series of the N-Strike line.
References in other media sectionsEdit
Just noticed you removed that section from the Raider article. Might I ask why? I really enjoy finding out about TV shows, etc. that have featured some of the various models of Nerf guns. I thought it was particularly interesting, even funny that a professional gun shop (the one on American Guns) keeps a Raider hanging on the wall (probably used for recreation in the shop or to blow off steam at work).
forum topic creation helpEdit
how do you set up a topic under a category and have it listed in the category? i tried a couple times (test) on my wiki. it doesn't show up.
i forgot, one last thine. could you put the "N-Force" series back on the homepage under series? you seemed to have replaced it with N-STrike Elite.
can you get on chat?
Barricade shoulder stockEdit
Back to the subject of recolored stocks (such as the one we merged the other day), shouldn't this one simply be merged into the Raider stock page? It is physically identical, other than the color, as far as I'm aware. It also might be worth noting in the trivia that resale prices for Barricades with this stock are often very high due to its rarity, similar to the Pinpoint sight.
i removed the other sections because the coding was wrong. that was copied from my forum which had bad coding. remember yesterday? we found out that the coding had problems. once i fix the coding there, i will copy it over. in the meantime, if you really want to keep the bad sections; that's fine with me.
RE: Dart BlasterEdit
Okay, thanks. I missed the word "generally". My mistake, sorry for calling your edit annoying. I'm fixing it rite nao.
Okay, I know that it is the only blaster that actually uses missiles, but it is a very popular blaster and I don't believe it should be left out just because there is only one blaster that uses it. No offense, but that was an annoying edit on your part.
so what default coding did i delete?
the default thing only appears for watercooler or help desk. are you supposed to add a category to the page. all the others, when you make a topic the page is blank. is there a template that i am missing?
i will keep that in mind next time. i really do think the rumors should be removed and put back in later. the strong arm is suspicous-found at a yard sale but lives in RI where hasbro is based. it looks like a prototype as well.
Hey, i'd just like to know if it would be okay to put up the Strongarm page, since it's been discovered. I'd like to start the page, unless there's any concerns. Thanks, Gage 02:06, August 1, 2012 (UTC)
Odd Nerf sight on eBayEdit
Any idea which sight this is on the gun in the auction? http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nerf-N-Strike-Single-Shot-Pistol-with-Sights-/330771200268?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4d037ff90c#ht_500wt_1414
At first glance I thought it was the Pinpoint sight, but it is clearly not that.
edit: nevermind, figured out that it is the remote for the Disk Shot game. Saw another one in a different auction.
regarding new elite rumorsEdit
why are we still adding in rumors that have not even been confirmed? this is what got pocket into trouble last time. i do believe that in adult fans of nerf's elite part 2 video, they did mention the following: jolt and other small blasters coming in 2013, designers like big blasters (probably referencing a sniper and stampede upgrade).
i am reporting the leaked product, nerfnation ahs been notified of the ebay link already-submitted yesterday.
as for the reviews, can we please show some restraint on waiting until the blasters are released?
anyways, i have made a few changes to my guidelines. Rumors will not be posted until a name is confirmed and an image of some sort has been released by Hasbro INC. i am also against modification (hacking a video game). likewise a customer review is always only found on a shopping website.
this is NOT leaked information, its STOLEN. "nerf community" haha, so unorganized bunch of people, don't even know what the correct course of action is. stolen products up for listing on ebay calls for reports to law enforcement.
as for no endorsement, i say its better to be on the good side than on the bad side.
let's just say that i had a change of heart. i didn't want the strongarm as an article because it doesn't qualify as a rumor, its STOLEN PROPERTY! its not as bad as the stuff that pocket posted on elite, but it still is bad.
as for modification, have you ever watched Toy story 1? remember sid, that's why i am against modificaiton. its the same as hacking a video game.
well, we created the forum partly for rumor/speculation talk. it should go there rather than on an actual article. as for sid, its a similar concept.
if you want to discuss a blaster or rumor then post it to the forum. its ready to go. even if its a legit product, it should be considered now to be a rumor until a confirm. that means don't make a page for it, make a forum topic.
as for sid, not only did he blow up toys for fun; he also modified them by switching parts.
i added the topic to general discussion board (forum). If you are fine with it, then i will start to move over the rumors from elite. i put up basic rumor speculation to start the thread.
I think it would be better if we let GG handle off-brand while i do Nerf. i think this way would be better, these pages should be left unlocked once everything is set up.
Community vote Edit
Hi, I'd just like to inform you that I've set up a community vote, and I'd really appreciate it if you could voice your opinions on it. This particular community vote focuses on the state of the unconfirmed N-Strike Elite blasters. The link is here. Thanks for your time, Gage 21:19, August 4, 2012 (UTC)
i talked to buzzsaw yesterday and he agreed with me, if you still don't understand then i suggest that you re-read my post.
like i have stated before, the blasters are "upcoming" but haven't been confirmed officially yet. i do believe that i agred with you guys on the chat the other day that the blasters will come but not until next year.
if you really want to add information that is technically confirmed then we need a speculation template and also an unconfirmed released product template due to the fact that hasbro doesn't officiallly announce everything.Nerfmaster8 (talk) 20:08, August 5, 2012 (UTC)
Could you restore these pages so i can add more information to the reliable sources? Either add that information to the section or link it.
by the way, i created a new template to solve the issue of color scheme series that Hasbro doesn't officially announce. Its called "unconfirmed released product", its different from your "soft release" template.
the title confused some people, the one i created is different. This was for unconfirmed release, yours was for quiet release. There is a difference.
I just want you to put the bloggers back in, i didn't have a chance to add it to the guidelines yet. You can delete it once i am done or just message me the information on foam from above, and other friends of hasbro.
never mind about the blogs, i thought that you actually deleted the pages. it seems like you just moved them to a single page.
it seems as if the blockade is a double article (single & double)-title.
are you sure that the blockade (single and double) are separate? the image looks exactly the same-no joke.
do you mind if i change "soft release" to "early release", it kind of removes the confusion. in addition the template i made was for the color series.
yeah i fixed the page, the unconfirmed release should cover for what was changed in the original template. as for the elite maverick, its probably best to remove slam fire and rename the page to "elite maverick" due to the fact that information is definetly leaked. The rest can be gotten from the image that was provided by hasbro Singapore. If you feel like that information may be lost, its already in the forum topic or you can add it to the talk page.
Nite Finder EX-3 Sight editsEdit
While I can understand most of the edits you made on this, why did you change the capitalization of the word "Sight"? If you look closely at the image of the instruction manual page, it is consistantly capitalized there, so the word "Sight" is actually part of the name Nerf used for it.
strongarm leaked informationEdit
okay so its existance has been confirmed, that changes it from a rumor to a little bit of leaked information (official name + slam fire). previously we agreed to leave leaked information out of the articles, do you wish to change that policy? So do you want to let Gage leave the leaked information in the page or take it out?
Raider & ReconEdit
I'd say that the fact that both of these have been pulled from store shelves (and put on clearance at Target at the very least, probably other stores too) and replaced by the Rampage and Retaliator is pretty good proof that they have been discontinued. Both guns are showing as out of stock online and in stores on both Target and Walmart's web sites as well. They are still listed on the Toys R' Us site, but I doubt that will last very long, probably just selling through their remaining stock (they've always, as far as I've seen, been the last to sell out of something that was discontinued, due to their higher prices on most things). I thought it was already understood that they were being replaced by the Elite models?
it seems as if most of the problems (bad edits) are caused by wiki contributers who don't have an account. i was just wondering, would it be useful to only allow "registered accounts" to edit here? it would solve the problem much faster, its just a basic protect of the pages; not really harming that much...
as for the news page, i would like to add information from the officially reconized bloggers. This would give additional information when information is given to them and posted into articles, also safeguards the confirmed edits.
new product-urban taggersEdit
would you mind if i created this page? seems like a legit product to me.
i know your concern, that the image may not be seen but the slideshow is much more organized than a random image or gallery. its in the center of the page as well. so do you think my design works or should it be tweaked?Nerfmaster8 (talk) 21:11, August 11, 2012 (UTC)
i know that GameGear360 brought this up in chat but i wasn't able to respond. now i do realize that this is a good idea but its a bit redundant since all the information is in the article itself already. was the purpose to create a reference? if you want to know an example, check nerfipedia's articles.
thanks for the clarification on the last messages. by the way, what is the correct coding to a reference? i know it has something to do with "ref" in <>.
ps: "null" apparently started to appear in my previews for some reason recently, are you seeing this?
are you against the gallery system that gage made? if not, i think that would work just fine. i mean currently the text is in between 2 images (box art and info boxes).
as for the community vote, i added some of my last thoughts. Hope that you will take that into consideration when writing the consensus tomorrow.
is this going to be left locked? i kind of want to add a bit of information such as adding in direct links to the officially reconized blog posts on released information (blasters from nerf/press release kits/emails). sorry for multiple message.Nerfmaster8 (talk) 23:15, August 11, 2012 (UTC)
Just went to look at the page for the Whiteout series, and it is blank, yet looking at the edit history shows it correctly. Something odd going on there.
- edit: now its back to normal. Never mind.
Color series updateEdit
Hasbro singapore has confirmed only that the "green sonic series" are currently being sold in Toys ‘R’ Us.
Okay, but I have a question, how do you use pictures that were already uploaded on a different page because when I try using them I have to copy them and that is how I get them on my page. Could you help me with that? Thanks Firestar25 (talk) 02:48, August 15, 2012 (UTC)
since the gallery idea is starting to be implemented by a template on the article page, wouldn't it be a good idea to do the same for the review? either that or a forum category that is fake (not a real category for topics) but acts like a list of reviews. This would make it easier on people to search for things, otherwise its a bit difficult hence the search only gets results when "spelled correctly".
i know, you have told me a dozen times. i was just asking since it popped into my head, based on the gallery. just wanted to make sure the pages were easy to find.
is it possible to set the recent activity manually for normal users on what to see? kind of want to avoid the subpages and forum posts, gets in the way of actual articles.
Speedload 6 galleryEdit
The pic you just added of the nerf model firing the speedload 6 is flipped sideways.
Did You Know & Profile templatesEdit
Would you rather me make a forum topic under General Discussion Board or simply make a blog post?
as for the profile templates, i was thinking of identifying modders and non-modders to prevent confrontations between the two groups. 2 templates in mind are: modification and anti-modification. another way to do it is to make the "anti-modification" template and have everyone assume that no template = its okay to talk about modding. There are always a few in the community who takes things to far, this is a way to prevent that. Its similar to the pokemon community, some overly competitive people are unable to communicate with uncompetitive people in a good way.
Did you know & profile templatesEdit
So where would you rather have the Did You Know page? blog post/forum topic
as for the profile template, its easier with a template or two for easy insert
Rules, article layout & guidelinesEdit
Super Soaker articles Edit
If you don't mind, I'd like to begin to create Super Soaker articles soon, I've been getting pretty anxious. Would it be alright to start moving pre-existing articles to "Super Soaker: Arctic Shock" and so on? I have plenty of time this weekend from what I know, so I could probably start to work on a bunch of articles. Gage 14:09, August 17, 2012 (UTC)
Pyragon drum imageEdit
could you delete the current image, its not working. This image uploading thing is a bit buggy. link: http://www.aggrogate.com/2012/08/nerf-pyragon-hasbros-funky-futuristic-fastfiring-disc-flinger/
Hornet AS-6 Edit
Hey Jet, I noticed a problem on the Hornet AS-6 page. In the "reloading and firing" section, it says 10 pumps to maximum power, but the review says 15. A fix on this would be greaty appreciated. Thanks!
Moving Strongarm article, updating articlesEdit
so when are we going to implement the consensus reached? i was hoping that the page would be a redirect sometime soon...
as for the articles, you can copy those over. i have changed the protection to so that only registered users can edit on my wiki. i plan to start adding articles to my wiki in the near future when i have time.
doesn't seem like you copied everything over (article layouts), you also removed the forum link in the process. seems like the extra elite information still needs to be added, got to check the blogs. as for news, you forgot the blog post links.
do you still want the modification category on the forum, already deleted page from my wiki-still on my blog post though. getting ready to delete the blog post soon.
News and article layoutEdit
could you make a new heading, i can barely find your reply in my talk page-yes, its a mess. as for news, i don't know what your planning to do. the news page is already updated. from now on, we can just add in the blog posts to the article reference but also put it under news just in case.Nerfmaster8 (talk) 01:17, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
nerf mods & review requestEdit
Do you plan on adding the blog posts?
ps: sorry for the edit war.
i have all the links/sources, i just omitted Nerfnation posts due to the fact that anyone can see them. The blog posts stand out more. I can go and add those links in if you wish.Nerfmaster8 (talk) 00:37, August 22, 2012 (UTC)
Could you delete both of my blog posts, i don't need them anymore. Thanks
as for the modification portal, what do you guys even plan to allow? i thought modification was moved off the article...why is that section still under article layouts? i removed the section for that reason.
"Instead of actively trying to fix things like you so claim, you constantly just tell others what to do". i do fix the bad edits, but now i am telling them to stop. i have told wiki contributors to check the manual of style, guidelines before they continue to edit. some understood and stopped, while others have not. i don't believe that the majority of those edits were made with good intentions. some may be confused to where information should be added, that is fine.some information added can be re-inserted or added to a blog post. what isn't fine is making the same poor edit over and over again after being told to stop the first time. You know of the problem but yet let it continue to happen, i really don't know what else i can do besides seriously telling them to stop. the warning templates did their job partially. besides me seriously telling them to stop or they may get a ban (you see this as a threat/being mean), they won't listen. The warning templates were in fact designed to tell these people to stop, how effective are they? i don't think they are very effective, though i do want to know your answer.
you accuse me of being rude to staff; pretty sure all the improvement ideas i have told both of the administrators are useful along with the site problems. All i say is the truth, gamegear did attempt to fix the problem with warnings but those warnings have not been as effective. the vandals are no longer scared of those warnings, they stopped for a bit because they thought we were serious. sadly, we were not. you don't think that this is a problem but other bigger wikis have solved this problem in their own way, i don't see it happening all that often on other wikis.
badmouthing the site? the only thing i said was the truth: "Their policy of "anyone can edit regardless" has not been working since the beginning it was allowed. This conclusion is based of a long period of fixing wiki contributor's edits to pages". you even said before and confirmed this policy. People may be free to edit but most wikis don't allow them to edit what ever they wish such as messing up the layout or adding/removing information from articles. most wikis have effective policy that prevent bad edits, sometimes it was a mistake but when its the same thing that is posted over and over then they have indeed crossed the line and need to be told to stop. and since you don't wish to stop them and prevent articles from being damaged, i continued my wiki in order to so when those articles are added, those articles can be maintained without disruptions to a completed page.
adult fans of nerf posted the elite part 2 podcast (hour long video), in it they mentioned that blogs and other things are moving in the direction of being professional. You are trying to keep this site professional while allow multiple poor edits, same bad edits happen multiple times, to continue. I really don't understand your point.
i am willing to work with both you and gamegear360, but when you both ignore half the things i send (improvements/problems) then it becomes a problem. i will say honestly that you guys did try to stop the problem, but it is time to move on to an additional restriction as the majority of wiki contributor edits have been proven to be counter productive. if you don't think that they are counter productive, then i would love to hear your definitition of counterproductive.
"They really cannot be run by one person. Perhaps they can be overseen by one person, but one person can not be the only one to contribute." I use multiple offiicial sources and i do check what has been released when i don't have time to see it. i don't start to edit unless i do my homework (catch up to date information), this should be a standard that almost everyone uses if they are serious editors. some people may not have time to do this, that is fine but they should not be quick to remove confirmed information (when it is referenced) or add in false information/speculation. i see myself as a serious nerfer that is able to oversee a wiki, information wise similar to bulbapedia or wikipedia. i think that each wiki that has a topic should be overseen or run by someone who is interested in the topic a lot. honestly speaking, i see you as a coder rather than a leader here. i don't plan to be the only one contributing on my wiki, i just plan on preventing known vandals from editing at all-it works.
Like the wiki contributor who said "nerf wiki and nerfipedia are childish, should allow more modification to bring in the modding community", that shows that he/she cares about modification just as much like i care about the articles on this wiki. i strongly believe that i could actually run the article pages on this wiki better than you, though you probably don't think that i could
i would actually rather that you remove the pages that you copied over if you shall force me to leave...as that permission would be revoked, you and gamegear can create your own that is based off your preferences; you guys seem to want to do things differently.
for good intention edits, its not possible to fix it unless i undo it. after i undo the edit, i then manually add the information (useful only) back into the correct section. my warnings are in the edit summary, it may provoke them into continuing but that is just me venting my frustration.
some people may not have time to check up, but the news section is supposed to get them up to date. the news section has everything all there so that they don't have to search for it, a link is set with all the indirect links. Official posts don't need a reference, as its now public knowledge.
i apologize for giving the false sense of authority but you have given that particular wiki contributor a warning before. yesterday, the contributor was given a warning by someone else before i even stepped in to intervene. not only did he/she ignore the warning given, the contributor continued to damage pages-turning it into weapon related information. if i did not step in, the user would have continued and damaged who knows how many pages. even though i agree with him, that is our own separate opinion that should be left to our blogs or the forum topic. by removing the chat and forum links, those are now just as useless as before.
since the staff here isn't big enough and the Nerf community doesn't seem to care about this improvement in the site then maybe a few bots need to be created. The bots should be identified so active users are not suprised by them. i was hoping that the rest of the community would come but that is not the case anymore.
as for modification, i was only backing up what i was trying to prove. the modification articles will be difficult to create since the modding community just doesn't care about this site, they have other resources avaliable to use (sgnerf, modworks, nerf mods & reviews).
i started a new one since this one just keeps on getting targetted for attack, the new one will have policy in place that prevents disruption to the editing community. I have been looking at other big wikis to learn about their policy and how effective they are. i then create a similar policy, that is decent to use. even if we add the policy that i created on nerf wiki, it won't do anything as people continue to ignore the rules. my wiki will have bots in the future to mointor it while i am gone.
in addition, my wiki is not just nerf. it covers all dart blasters. i am not going to be the only one editing, i plan to ask nerfnation if anyone is interested in a new better community that won't be disrupted.Nerfmaster8 (talk) 20:58, August 30, 2012 (UTC)
New header Edit
I have created a new header on articles that shows links to /Gallery and /Reviews on those pages now. If there's anything I should change or add to it, please let me know. This is just a prototype, I'm checking to see if the community likes it. Thanks, Gage 22:13, August 30, 2012 (UTC)
- I think this header should be enough for now. We'd have to make one for Super Soaker as well, but the only thing that would really change would be "Template:Color2", which would have to be changed to like "Color3". Anything we should improve? There's two other slots for if we ever decide to add another section, it should be simple. Gage 18:06, August 31, 2012 (UTC)
Rating System ProblemsEdit
JetCell, wouldn't large blasters fire faster than medium sized blasters? Since it is powered by batteries, wouldn't it have capabilities that exceed blasters smaller than them. The large blasters that are still active have firing speeds that are much greater than medium blasters, meaning that the grading curve should be harder. I only know of 2 non- semi guns that would be able to have a 10 for firing speed, the raider and the rampage. The larger blasters mostly have firing speeds of 10
Discontinued blasters categoryEdit
The Discontinued blaster category still exists, Gamegear wants to delete and create a new one based on grammar. i understand that a new category is needed but deleting before its creation is not a good idea, which is why i removed the delete template.
I have sent a report to the vanadalism spam fighting task force to request help as counter productive edits are getting out of hand. From this, I will come to check up on things though i will continue working on my own wiki until issues here are resolved.Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:59, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
While looking at Eliminator, I noticed that the review page only linked to the bottom of the page. Is that now on all articles with the tab? The review page was intended to be the page where the users get to voice their own opinions and share their own reviews, which is what we planned earlier. Just a little confused right now. Gage 20:47, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
I looked back at the problem and i was thinking maybe that an amend could be made to the consensus... The thing that would be changed is that speculation would be allowed but only on the article talk page. Leaked, rumored or un intended released information would still be forbidden to be added to the talk page. likewise, the strongarm article would stay on the forum but speculation on the other 2 confirmed blasters speculation would be acceptable in the talk page as long as it doesn't get out of hand.
It feels as though its still good to talk about the speculation and since the forum isn't being used, the article talk pages could be used a bit more. Some of this does have to do with recent complaints and edits to pages. i just feel as though this change would be more beneficial to the wiki as a whole.
at this point, suggesting additional rules or policy isn't going to solve anything. I have realized that as a fact and that it can't be changed. I will continue to help out on this wiki, though not as much after i get my wiki up and running. i would rather have a wiki that eventually gets on Hasbro's good side and maybe get an endorsement or sponsership. If they want joint control (doubt they want full), i will be fine with it as that is the main purpose of my wiki; to get accurate official information rather than including information that doesn't exactly belong in articles such as clip orientation (Hailfire), modification, reviews (moved to forum) and other information that doesn't belong. some information belongs on the blogs (reviews, modding, speculation, not needed info/nice to know). i will not remove that information that doesn't exactly belong as i fear that either you or others will revert my edits. i just don't feel as productive on this wiki anymore, sadly. it seems as if opinion on how to run this wiki has differed to an extent that a split is not preventable. i apologize for the arguments that we have had in the past, all of that was for improvement but it has not all worked out as hoped. i wish this wiki well on providing information based on community standards in the future after i start to leave.Nerfmaster8 (talk) 07:09, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
new elite blastersEdit
I didn't create the pages because we didn't have that much information in the first place, don't know why you did. The information released could be changed, isn't exactly finalized. i would rather that we wait for more information to constitute an actual article than small bits of info.
new blasters and speculationEdit
my point is if we allow speculation on the articles and when the information is proved wrong, then there will be conflicts. Some people would rather the speculation stay even though we have to change the info. I would just rather not have it on the article in the first place but allow it in the talk page. the speculation would simply be manually moved and further addition of it would be looked down upon, there isn't even that much. i only suggested this because you don't want to use the forum anymore. i mean you removed the chat and forum links. I tried to move the speculation but gamegear won't let me-i don't have permission.
The jolt information isn't likely, the jolt is very compact meaning there is very little that Nerf can do to upgrade it. if we need speculation to explain a new blaster then it doesn't constitute a page, then its just full of random theories much like the hailfire.
Bluedragons contested me on updating the vulcan history, i just don't want any more disagreements. i don't like having speculation on the articles because later it can be changed and when change happens it just becomes a mess.
as for the new blasters, i didn't create a page for the firestrike or jolt in the beginning because we had little to no content avaliable. The point is to only create articles when enough information constitutes an article, right now we have just about nothing- the name could change. I planned to only include those as a list on the page, no article yet. leaving those as a normal text list should be fine, that doesn't mean that the products don't exist. its to prevent speculation from being added as its not useful. not creating the articles doesn't mean we are disregarding their existance, the strategy is to wait for the time being until additional inforamation is released. I am surprised that new product information is getting leaked out so early.Nerfmaster8 (talk) 01:57, September 9, 2012 (UTC)
article talk pageEdit
let's continue our discussion hereEdit
since there are people on both sides of the argument, i think that it would be best to split off. So a colaberation effort could work between nerf wiki and dart blaster encyclopedia in which nerf wiki does community while mine does official to solve the issue at hand. This is getting frustrating to deal with, gamegear and me are on opposite ends of the argument. moderating this isn't going to work, neither side is going to back down anytime soon.
i plan to have my wiki up and running by the end of next year so that will help. the purpose is to have 2 different wikis. one for official news and the second a place for speculation and rumor in articles. sadly one wiki won't work for this topic so i think its best to let my wiki to stay. as i said before, more rules won't do a thing here.
as for rumors and leaks, that stuff really ought to stay on the blogs and not here. as for modification, maybe we should have a poll for that. i mean most people use the blogs for that purpose so i don't think we need articles on that overall. speculation on articles also is a bad idea, putting it on the talk page is a better idea-ruff cut, elite jolt.
Article history: this should be more on successor/predecessor and re-releases than where information on the blaster was first discovered. where it was discovered is considered fun facts-doesn't relate to the article.
new template: so if this is the case then the strongarm doesn't consitute an article then, the entire thing is rumor/leaks.
RE: let's continue our discussion here Edit
I think this may have something to do with past experiences with spammers, trolls and vandals. I also did not know gage that well before the merge. i first found nerfipedia and it was totaled, then i saw that you were trying to keep nerf wiki afloat so i decided to help you upgrade and maintain articles. Now it seems like that isn't the case anymore, you are trying to moderate half and half on all issues. As much as this wiki is informational, having speculation-even the smallest bit-does throw people off.
the ideas that are clashing currently: keeping leaks and rumors on talk pages or adding it to articles.
my wiki would not be in a loop, i am allowing speculation, rumor and leaks to be discussed in the forum on my wiki. i do accept information from the officially reconized blogs, just keeping the rumors and extra fun facts off the wiki as it just clogs up space.
i know you didn't move the strongarm article, i was trying to prove bluedragon's point-to be more consistent. if the template is to stay then that article is no longer constituted as its based on just leaks and nothing else.Nerfmaster8 (talk) 01:09, September 11, 2012 (UTC)
on my wiki, i plan to keep all rumors, speculation, leaks, un-intended release of information off article pages but will allow it in the forum i have created. This makes the articles more reliable and is better than the talk pages. while some information is good to know such as leaks or rumors, it doesn't belong on an article until it is verified by a reliable source.
article talk page: asking editors to leave it in the talk page isn't going to work as most just insert it without thinking-happens quite frequently with this wiki. blasters can be chatted about but no rumors or speculation, that would be moved to the forum to maintain quality. rather than later going through the talk pages and removing any old speculation, i would rather just not add it in the first place. if the talk page works for here, that is fine.
example: i did not create the elite jolt, ruff cut, stride, firestrike or strongarm article because we were either missing a bunch of information in which it didn't constitute an article or it was a bunch of leaks. my path is to wait for additional information before creating the article as to not have to use speculation to describe a blaster. if speculation has to be used to explain then an article is not constituted. it may be good to create the article with a sentence but sometimes its not worth it. a simple list could work with a short description or put it in the forum, though you have removed the forum.
speculation sometimes is proved wrong and common sense doesn't always work or apply in situations. Gage wants to add any information that we receive from any where, this is the same thing as allowing leaked information into articles. even though he does agree that random information that can't be backed up should not be added, i do not agree with adding leaks at all. it will only make Hasbro notice more and they could start to ignore this wiki as a whole soon or take action similar to pocket. i am not going to continue this argument with him. community thinking should be left in the blogs (rumor and speculation talk) in my opinion.
i have talked to foam from above and he said to play it safe, which is what i am doing with the elite info. i am still not going to release it as we are already iffy on the new leaks/rumors popping up. i would rather be safe then sorry, pocket was not careful and went too far.
in the pocket incident, foam from above reposted nerfnation's status of "2 sides to a story" and i wasn't happy at first but now i understand why that happened. dj did try to calm people and that eventually got to me. gamegear would probably follow in suit in taking this wiki down that same path to trouble if he keeps on pushing for leaks to be added to articles.
Been awhile Edit
Hey whats up? Hey could you do me a favor? Answer this question for me. When ever I add a photo it says added by jetcell of firestar25 and I know that you know how to fix that. Can you tell me how to? Thanks Firestar25 (talk) 01:59, September 12, 2012 (UTC)
We could probably get away with merging all of them together on one page under different categories, so that pages like "Super Soaker:2009" (which had one whole blaster) aren't close to empty. It may be a bit long, but it would probably be better than to create a bunch of other similar pages, making it slightly harder for some people to find what they are looking for. Gage 20:23, September 13, 2012 (UTC)
my blog postEdit
Late response Edit
Super Soaker renaming and portal systemEdit
Sorry if this goes off as rude, but it seem as if this re-ramp project was stopped half way through. i get that you guys got school, but it wasn't the best idea to only let so many people work on the coding. more trustworthly editors could have helped finish the project. Do you and gage plan on fixing the broken links anytime soon. The portals are barely finished while the broken links to super soaker were ignored when brought up by bluedragons a month ago. even if i wanted to fix the broken links, i can't find them. i apologize again if i am complaining.Nerfmaster8 (talk) 18:17, September 20, 2012 (UTC)
super soaker talk pageEdit
When ever you have time, could you delete the Super soaker talk page and move the discussion over to the correct page so that we can get rid of the broken redirect? Thanks Nerfmaster8 (talk) 06:42, September 21, 2012 (UTC)
Well anyways, here is the link http://nerf.wikia.com/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Main_Page. I hope you can understand which links don't belong on there... Nerfmaster8 (talk) 19:59, September 22, 2012 (UTC)
when ever you have time, the navigation should be updated. Since you deleted the comparison pages, that link should be removed-its a dead link. for nerf products, vortex should be renamed "disc blasters".
rather than a portal system, the header navigation could be used instead as the coding isn't going to work anytime soon. I just took a shot at it and it just directs to the mainpage, individial articles won't accept coding similar to the main page correctly. i actually tried it on my wiki, i suggest a different approach such as the following separate headers. The nerf header would consist of lists.
- Nerf: dart blasters, disc blasters (Vortex), sports, other
- Off-Brand: Buzz Bee, Lanard, X-Shot
- Community: Forum, chat, important docs (manual of style, guidelines)
- Modification: self explanatory though its not much of a section if we don't allow tutorials.
moving this wiki towards professional isn't going to work if leaks and other info is added though it depends on how far you wish to go.
i actually gave up using the slider as a portal system, i relented and went back to the original design that others are using-pointing the links to the basic article (Nerf, off-brand and super soaker). sometimes trying to create something just won't work on wikia.
Well, It seems as if your plan was the same one that i tried to use but failed. You can't get the same layout plan as the home page, which defeats the purpose. it just doesn't look as neat when its all expanded out. I found an alternative, using the top navigation. You missed putting sports as a header (includes fire vision and dart tag), instead put it under other.
as for the product table, not sure if that actually looks that good on the wiki as the navigation should replace it. though i don't even know if the current slider is good or not-as in does it fit. on the topic, can you add more than 4 pictures to the slider? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 18:31, September 27, 2012 (UTC)
dart tag is the official Nerf sport, so i would put it under sports though.
i thought that the slider would work but it seems as if i am limited to 4 pictures, is this accuracte? if it is possible to extend the limit to like 7 it would be enough. this is the same problem i am facing on my wiki for the product table that you have here, it looks a bit out of place. i think the top navigation works better, though having clickable pictures to series is a good idea.
as for super soaker, i would put it that under Nerf. i listed super soaker and made a list for storm series and larami. really sure why we need a separate portal for that though it does look good. as for the portals, is it possible to have it similar to the home page without the right column thing-recent activity, ads. otherwise the normal page doesn't work as well. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 20:47, September 27, 2012 (UTC)
it seems like your plan may work but a special request may be needed. Rather than a normal article page, a noncontent page-main page-would solve the problem. An example would be a new special page dedicated to portals. more info: http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Help:Custom_namespaces
Years + Super Soaker Edit
Would it be a good idea to start having Super Soaker products in year articles? I've set up an example at 1989 to show what it would look like. I'd like to hear your take on whether or not we should have it in the articles. Gage 15:25, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
When ever you get a chance, could you take a look at the talk page and decided if you want to merge the pps into the original article or not. new information-urban taggers- shows that it is a new color scheme, though information was from leaks.
as for the blockades, couldn't we merge those as well and name it "blockades". its essentially the same thing, double just havinga pair of the single blockade. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 18:26, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
Photo upload warningEdit
Recently, we have started to merge accessories that have been re-released. additional articles would include the single and double blockades, those are stub articles. Why not merge those as well?
Did you see my last message that was asking about the warning you put on the special:upload photo page? I was wondering how you did that because i want to create a similar one. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 23:35, October 3, 2012 (UTC)
old talk page discussionEdit
We may need some policy on naming image files correctly as i really don't get why we have random names. though i would still doubt that anyone would follow those basic rules what so ever. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 21:30, October 8, 2012 (UTC)
rumors vs leaksEdit
assume everything that you read from urban taggers (main source of rumors) is leaked information unless otherwise proven to be real-anouncement by official blogs or hasbro. all other community blogs simply spread the news around from urban taggers. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 21:36, October 8, 2012 (UTC)
Older Blaster Wikis Edit
nerfmaster8, jetcell, and gage,
I and a lot of other users have noticed that there is a lack of pictures in a lot of the older blaster pages. I know you guys are working on changing the wiki pages on older guns, and I could help upload pics, but i don't know how to upload photos. Can someone shiow me how to add pics? JDB3326 (talk) 23:07, October 8, 2012 (UTC)
recent leaks of informationEdit
hasbro may have given approval for the wired article but the recent change of event which brought new information was not approved by hasbro. hasbro may confirm the blasters at a later date-happens most of the time. i still see that it wa not intended for us, if you check the link that urban taggers gave, hasbro already removed the rumored links. you can still find the info by doing a manual search.sorry for bringing this up again. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 17:12, October 9, 2012 (UTC)
urban taggers also posted the elite rayven, elite firefly darts, stryfle, incinerator (probably firestrike) and the vortex diatron. do you want to include those or ignore and wait for further announcements from hasbro? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 17:57, October 9, 2012 (UTC)
previous forum consensus vs suggested policyEdit
so are you and gage going to rewrite guidelines or continue to follow the previous consensus? also take a look at the additional post i made on the talk page. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 19:21, October 10, 2012 (UTC)
i don't know which articles we have, just giving a direct link to the website selling the products.
- helmet camera - http://www.debenhams.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/prod_10001_10001_171010838899_-1?breadcrumb=Home%7EToys+%26amp%3B+games
- mp3 player - http://www.debenhams.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/prod_10001_10001_171010838999_-1?breadcrumb=Home%7EToys+%26amp%3B+games
- digital camera - http://www.debenhams.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/prod_10001_10001_171010864299_-1?breadcrumb=Home%7EToys+%26amp%3B+games
- digital camera - http://www.debenhams.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/prod_10001_10001_171010864399_-1?breadcrumb=Home%7EToys+%26amp%3B+games
so you removed the info box i added in for the super soaker page so that gage could create the nerf super soaker article and put in an info box for series? not quite sure i understand your logic here, but wouldn't this be considered a duplicate article? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 22:37, October 13, 2012 (UTC)
It seems as if gage didn't exactly understand how the articles would be set up. He asked me to remove some of the extra templates, i did that and then he reverted the change-not sure i understand him on that. i left the speculation template in as to prevent the article from being flooded with random assumptions and speculation.
my understanding of the forum is that a topic is introduced and below that is a section for further discussing on that topic. since the current information is unconfirmed/leaked, i strongly suggest that it is left in the discussion section. the way how i set up the rumor pages is that the beginning is introducing the topic (bullets with any extra or unique features). further discussion is encouraged in the discussion section rather than added to the article itself as there is the chance that we go back to constant counter productive edits-remember before the rumor/leak policy of almost everyday random information was added to articles, this is to prevent that but allow those comments in the discussion.
the unconfirmed and speculation warning templates were designed to prevent further rumors or leaks from being added to articles. i have also added links to the other older rumors/blasters that had particially leaked info (stryfle).
as for correcting information, i think it would be best to remove discussion once the article is updated if a simple question is asked to verify the accuracy of confusing info. an example is the swarmfire stock, the article initially listed it as similar to the longstrike stock-not removeable, i post a question on the talk page and that is when i found out that it was incorrect and updated the article. the thing that i am pointing out is that if we don't remove old useless discussion then further replies may be given to a closed discussion-happened with the hailfire talk page. i didn't remove the speculation chat and then a month after we got the confirmed info, someone replied even though the article was updated.
if someone has done research or knows info on a blaster then i would rather have them update the article rather than starting an argument. i didn't like to argue with gage earlier today, but i still don't understand why he didn't just fix the reviews rather than deleting those in the first place. he did create a review afterwards and posted a link. sorry for the long message, i just feel that this was needed to be said. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 06:39, October 17, 2012 (UTC)
so is the firing range based off flat or angled? i don't think we should be basing off the max range without noting which it is.
just a heads up, the toy fair will be held next febuary, new light strike products. i guess we may get a sneak peak at new products next year, its not going to be enough to confirm any info-probably just like last year with the teaser. not going to get good quality images. info from foamfromabove facebook. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 01:39, October 18, 2012 (UTC)
i really doubt that anything of high value will be shown off though, maybe super soaker though i doubt it. we could see the smaller blasters but no probably won't get info on the big blasters. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 01:50, October 18, 2012 (UTC)
what about speculation discussion in the talk pages, do you want to remove those-already have been-do you want to restore the history or just leave it out. pertaining the elite blasters*
the discussion argument was whether or not speculation was kept in the article or left in the comment section of the forum. based on normal forum discussion, any further comments that can't be backed up or completely proved would be posted in the comments. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 02:33, October 18, 2012 (UTC)
so do you want to place those speculation discussion back into the elite talk pages or leave them out, they got a bit long just as a warning.
not sure you understand the problem with the forum discussion, gage wants to keep assumptions and speculation in the actual forum article rather than putting it in the discussion. the discussion is for speculation anyways, that's why the article was moved. only confirmed info should be in the article to separate the info a bit better than cramming everything into it. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 02:38, October 18, 2012 (UTC)
even with your way, you forgot to end the resolved part. i think that discussion was a misconception in which someone created a random page ith inaccurate info. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 02:48, October 18, 2012 (UTC)
just curious, would you like a double column news template. the idea is to have official on the left column and community on the right column. community would include rumors, leaks and unconfirmed info from urban taggers or other blogs. for an example of how this would look, see ice age wiki. i create it sucessfully there. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 03:07, October 18, 2012 (UTC)
if you want, i can set it up as i can copy the code over easily i just need access to the news template for a bit of time. i created the templates already, made completely new ones. link to final template: http://nerf.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Mainbodynews
Wait, information from basic nerf, adult fans of nerf, foam from above are all considered indirect official info. wouldn't it more proper to put that under official? it fits better under that title. i also renamed the current news archive to "official news/archive" as its a better name since the current news template is being split. the news template should also be renamed to keep consistency.
articles requiring deletionEdit
i think that you may have missed a few articles that are no longer needed: forum:new elite rumors and the pin point elite talk page. link: http://nerf.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Candidates_for_deletion.
as for the forum article, i got another suggestion for it to work. would the following layout work for minimal information rumors? this layout will help to separate information.
- actual article/introduction of info (confirmed info only)
- speculation/assumption section (majority of community has to agree with it/its obvious but at the moment can't be backed up)
user talk pages vs message wallEdit
it seems like a lot of people like to reply to messages on their own talk page, this kind of makes it hard to keep track of replies. I have started to use the message wall, a new feature, on my wiki and it seems to do a lot better. every reply generates a notification making it easier for people. i hope that you do take this into consideration as it will benefit the wiki more than just a simple poll. you can even choose which messages to follow.
as for the news template, i was thinking shouldn't all the official info be added to the offical column? official would include:Toy Fair info, Hasbro announcements (invester presentations), Launch parties, official blogs (press release kits and emails), announcements from nerfnation. everything should go under community otherwise it won't really make a real difference if the official info is mixed in with the community rumors. this is a much more effective route to take then the one that you suggested yesterday. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 03:04, October 19, 2012 (UTC)
user talk pages vs message wallEdit
it seems like a lot of people like to reply to messages on their own talk page, this kind of makes it hard to keep track of replies. I have started to use the message wall, a new feature, on my wiki and it seems to do a lot better. every reply generates a notification making it easier for people. i hope that you do take this into consideration as it will benefit the wiki more than just a simple poll. you can even choose which messages to follow.
as for the news template, i was thinking shouldn't all the official info be added to the offical column? official would include:Toy Fair info, Hasbro announcements (invester presentations), Launch parties, official blogs (press release kits and emails), announcements from nerfnation. everything else should go under community otherwise it won't really make a real difference if the official info is mixed in with the community rumors. this is a much more effective route to take then the one that you suggested yesterday. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 03:05, October 19, 2012 (UTC)
sorry to bother you as i know that you have gotten notification of my last message but have not responded. i have told you my opinions, now i am asking for yours on "what is considered to be official information". if you could address the following, it would be helpful.
- Toy Fair info: any display images, teasers by Hasbro
- Hasbro announcements: investor presentations, archives
- official blogs: info from launch party events, press release kits, email conversations
- Nerf Nation: announcements, stock images that are posted, videos
- Nerf YouTube: any videos uploaded
well the thing is, this was to separate out official and community news. comunity news for this wiki would be based on the community, i was assuming that when i asked. so if that was the case then the information would be more split. so in this case all the official news would go under official, so anything of importance would go under that. all the rumors and stuff would be community. the guidelines even state that the official blogs can be sources of information, that too just makes it seems like you are contradicting yourself.
what your suggesting is to ignore the rumors and do an official spilt. what that would be is the left would be announcements and the other would be indirect info from the blogs. that's not what i had in mind nor when i asked you. when i asked, it was specifically official vs community information (rumors and stuff). i mean this is a community based wiki, not an official wiki that is based off official info. we have extra info that generally isn't necessary-extra info from the blogs that normally is just cool to know. my wiki is based off official info, so your thinking would apply to the news template.
i don't know if you saw the blog post on community central on the officially reconized wikis but looking at how you guys want a modification portal and the fact that we have modification articles; i doubt that hasbro would reconized ths wiki. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 23:27, October 20, 2012 (UTC)
Ratings ? Edit
So, jet, I am sorry if I seem to be repeating something that has come up billions of times, but some blasters are given 7's on their rate of fire, when on the template, it should be given a 2 or 3. I am wondering if we could fix this (I could probe around to check if you want) . <(") PsyclOwnd (talk) 01:57, October 21, 2012 (UTC)
news template exampleEdit
just to give a better example of what we are talking about, here is the news template that i plan to use on my wiki. link: http://dartblasterencyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Main_Body_News Nerfmaster8 (talk) 02:20, October 21, 2012 (UTC)
message wall feature?Edit
i asked you earlier in a message but you have not responded to the inquiry asking about replacing the current talk pages with the new message wall feature and turning on comments to articles. the message wall basically helps to prevent unsigned messages. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:37, October 21, 2012 (UTC)
off brand article?Edit
this is just like the previous argument that i had with gage, if there is something wrong and its useful then just fix it. don't just delete it, if we need it later. i have the articles, if you really want you guys are free to copy them. i have no problem with it.
rumor notification on series articleEdit
even though we are restricting the rumor to the forum, the rest of the community should be made aware of this. an easy way of doing this would be to create a new section in the article layout, a good spot would be after history. the idea is either a new header or a rumor discussion template. essentially what ever we choose would link to the forum post. this way the discussion continues with everyone else and also isn't forgotten. i may have asked gage, but he didn't respond yet.Nerfmaster8 (talk) 14:20, October 23, 2012 (UTC)
Did you receive the last few messages that i sent you regarding the following.
- message wall feature: more useful than the current talk pages and gives a more modern appearance.
- news template: I think the one i created on my wiki is what you had in mind, i attached a link in an earlier message to mine.
- rumor notification template: rather than a link to the forum discussion, I think some sort of template or article header would be useful so that the community can chat about the new rumors rather than letting it just rot. what i am asking is to split off rumors from products, would you be interested in doing that?
Could you give some feedback?
- I already said no to the message wall. Leave it as it is please. I hate the message wall, and no one else wants it either. It's not useful and it's annoying. Gage 22:17, October 26, 2012 (UTC)
Why do you keep on moving the page around? its probably best to leave it as it is until further information is released, redirects are getting a bit annoying.
can you delete the nerfnation and nerf product templates? those were broken redirects with no content what so ever.
as for now, the new jolt and reflex rumors could go either way-repaint or completely new blaster. now i do see why you moved it.
as for the rumors and speculation, gage mentioned that if we leave those on the forum then those may get forgotten. what i was suggesting was to split those off from the product table and make a new section on the series pages.
the old talk pages will be archived as read here: http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Help:Message_Wall. Gage apparently doesn't like the idea as he still doesn't understand how to "follow" and "unfollow" a message thread. at this point, maybe a poll could be taken to ask the rest of the community what they want?
as for the AFON speculation, that was just to add a recap of their half hour video as most people don't watch that long of a video. i only added it to continue to discussion. those were the main points that they talked about. since hasbro didn't ask them to take the video down, it seems to be fine to add to the discussion. if you want i can add in a special warning to prevent confusion.
I know that you guys are working on this but i do have to ask, why did you recently delete the home tables? I thought that we were going to use those, what happened? do you plan to put a template on the home page that links to other sections similar to how the Call of Duty wiki does it? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 07:02, October 28, 2012 (UTC)
category for deletionEdit
Please check up on the category as I have tagged a few images that were not needed, some were duplicates.
Are we going to use the following images or no?
- copyright template? http://nerf.wikia.com/wiki/File:Green_copyright.png
- actual portal set up? http://nerf.wikia.com/wiki/File:Nerf_Wiki-202443.png
seems like you missed 3 pictures to delete. http://nerf.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Candidates_for_deletion
off brand seriesEdit
- Lanard has two series; Clear-X and Total X-Stream Air. Buzz Bee has had Ultimate Blasters, Power Lock, Ruff Stuff (blasters from 2003-2007), Air Blasters (2008-2010, still sold overseas), Air Warriors (2011-Present) and Air Warriors Extreme. That's about it, I might be forgetting one. Gage 03:03, October 29, 2012 (UTC)
- you forgot Total X-Stream water blasters and the corps blasters by Lanard. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 03:17, October 29, 2012 (UTC)
hey jetcell,I'm all on board with the new rating system, but affordability needs to be factored in because it's not worth it to spend $30 on a nerf gun that performs just as well as a $6 nerf gun(raider vs jolt, for example). Another note, capacity should be based on catergory. For example, the jolt has a low score because it only comes with 2 darts, but it deserves a better score because it has an average capacity for its size. this is how the catergories should be:
Affordability:Is it worth the retail price? Would you buy it again?
Reliability:Does it jam a lot? Does it have good accuracy? Does it have a good capacity for its size? Does it require batteries to fire?
Range:How far will it fire with at least a 50% chance of hitting the target? How far is the maximum range?
Rate of Fire/Capacity:Does it have a ood stock capacity? Is it clip compatible? Is it possible to obtain more ammunition easily(ex. refill packs)? How fast can it be fired?
Size/Weight:Is it extremely heavy? Is it extremely bulky?
New Longshot Edit
- From what I know, there's no known box photos of the updated-packaging for the Longshot. All other blasters got new boxes in 2010, except it, if I remember correctly. Either way, this is the first time I've ever seen this box. Gage 00:31, October 30, 2012 (UTC)
actually the image that i reuploaded is the same one that you used for the article, we can use it for the gallery if you want. Its an image of just the car in a case display so that no one steals it. no need to delete the image. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 07:40, October 30, 2012 (UTC)
not sure where you got that "nerf" doesn't stand for anything but its correctly written as "NERF". with that said, the acronym means "non-expanding recreational foam". If you don't believe me, you can read the wikipedia article found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerf Nerfmaster8 (talk) 22:57, October 30, 2012 (UTC)
well, i just posted a question on Nerf Nation and sent one to foam from above. I guess we can wait and see what the response is, if it is then i will let you guys know.
i asked around on Nerfnation and i got a few positives that the acronym does in fact exist. if you want, we can wait for a reply from either foamfromabove or afon.
so your saying that this link (http://games.yahoo.com/blogs/unplugged/5-things-didn-t-know-nerf-170434565.html) is also incorrect? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:23, October 31, 2012 (UTC)
based on sgnerf's range results, this page should be merged with the n-strike jolt page. Its the same range, repainted blaster with a new shell design; pretty much a new box art design. the new shell could be added in as history information and the new images could be added to the gallery. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 23:51, November 1, 2012 (UTC)
elite stampede articleEdit
I think know why that article keeps on being created, its a modification that somebody posted online and some people are getting confused as to it being a new rumor. here is a link to the mod: http://lasagna678nerfmods.blogspot.com/2012/08/nerf-elite-stampede.html Nerfmaster8 (talk) 05:15, November 2, 2012 (UTC)
NERF acronym bustedEdit
Okay, i take your word on that it actually doesn't mean anything as the actual inventor stated it on his website. here is a link if you are interested: http://reynguyercreativegroup.com/?page_id=12&cat_id=5
Please read over the last bit of conversation between Nerfmaster8 and myself about this. In my opinion, there is enough of a difference between the Jolt EX-1 and the Elite Jolt for them to continue to have separate articles. If we merge them, then we should also merge some other articles such as the Dart Tag Firestrike and the N-Strike Nite Finder EX-3 (which are identical other than the name).
nite finder mergeEdit
it seems like bluedragons1971 wants to merge the dart tag firestrike and n-strike nite finder articles as he has noted that those are the same blaster that use different darts. even though they are under different series, do you think its a good idea to merge the articles? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 01:52, November 4, 2012 (UTC)
- I don't believe he ever said this. I think he was using it as an example of how the Jolt should get its own article. If you ask me, merging articles like that are pretty pointless. I mean, if we're going to get rid of the Firestrike and Jolt NSE pages, we might as well get rid of the Big Bad Bow/Tech Target re-releases. They're all the same bag; there was never a problem with having a similar blaster having another page before. When did this need a merging? If the Lightningstorm gets its own article, the NSE Jolt should too. I see no reason to merge it. Gage 17:40, November 4, 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks Gage. As you said, I never meant to imply that the Nite Finder and the older Firestrike should be merged, but that the Jolt EX-1 and the Elite Jolt shouldn't be merged, since the precedent has already been set. How Nerfmaster8 could so horribly misinterpret what I've been saying is beyond me. I'm guessing that English isn't his first language maybe? Somehow he even thought I was talking about merging the Elite Firestrike and the Nite Finder. At this point, it would be FAR more work to go back merging all of the older blasters that are identical than to simply leave the Elite Jolt alone. Why this has even been a debate is beyond me.
- Bluedragon1971 (talk) 19:40, November 4, 2012 (UTC)
Re:Elite Jolt released under sub-series?Edit
that was based off the information from Sgnerf, at the moment there is no "real difference" between the jolts besides the new muzzle piece. from Sgnerf's findings, same range and internals; i predict that its a repaint for maybe the new advertisement campaign. I really doubt that it will be a new blaster and that there are any "minor or major" details that we don't know yet; product has been leaked not sure what else could be done.
as for merging, we may need some actual rules on that. i never said to merge now, i was just pointing out which articles could potentially be merged. if the only difference is pricing and accessories, that can be noted in the color schemes.
since we have the reviews on separate pages, it would be possibly more effective in merging those all onto one page with headers to distingush between repaints.
color scheme exampleEdit
subseries (insert price): new accessories, any other "major" differences
reminder: create new monthly pollEdit
from the current list of poll suggestions on the talk page, I think that it would be best to stick with the elite theme for the next poll. I removed a few that were already done (Hail-Fire technically counts as the vulcan upgrade) and the rumors. the discontinued and full auto polls could be done during off time such as the holidays.
Poll suggestion: Which blaster would you like to see in the N-Strike Elite lineup?
- Alpha Trooper CS-18
- Longstrike/Longshot CS-6
- Stampede ECS
recent copied blastersEdit
It seems that the former nerf blasters that were being copied was the work of ziacong toys. here is the commercial: http://foamfromabove.blogspot.com/2012/06/wow-i-dont-even-know-where-to-start.html
- Wow, the copied ones are pretty blatant, but I would love to get my hands on that one (looks like it might be called Storm from the print on the blaster itself) that looks like an AR-15. And I do like the fact that they changed the Barricade to accept barrel extensions.
could you also look at the other 3 poll suggestions in the talk page? I fixed them up a bit, those could be used for the next 3 months though they don't really flow with the current theme of elite.
I know that we "all" came to an agreement on this once and had additional arguments pop up. I feel like Gage and JDB3326 are simply not bothering to keep in touch with the original consensus. I feel like, we come to an agreement and then they both start violating it.
I though the forum was for speculation and other stuff that didn't belong in the articles or am i missing something? It just the continuous confrontations that are getting a bit annoying. See for yourself in the history for the elite articles.
really about to start simply ignoring gage and just do it in a way that benefits the wiki. sorry to finally say this but i do have to question why gage is an admin, he doesn't seem neutral on many topics and causes a lot of the confrontations that i tend to avoid now. i tend to not start confrontations by fixing poor edits and then he just simply undoes it-leaks/assume/speculation.
- As I have been semi-active lately for schooling reasons, I have no idea what you're talking about. Do I have to reiterate that in the deadlines, four people voted to keep as is and three people voted differently? You added those votes in later and said that the votes on my side didn't count. You like to say you won, but you didn't, we just had to reach a consensus to keep you from complaining about it, to put it bluntly.
- I love you depict me as a bad person, saying I cause problems around here and whatnot. You don't see me complaining about every single thing and whining when I don't get my way. Go ahead, ignore me, as I don't care. I do what I think is right and what actually makes sense. Removing any bit of information about any unconfirmed blaster, removing the mentioning of them on any other pages entirely, and throwing the article into a rather hidden forum page is an unintelligent idea. I haven't caused any "confrontations" recently, with the exception of reverting your idiotic edit of removing the mentioning of the unconfirmed blasters.
- I've been tired of dealing with this for far too long. It's unheard of that you get your way every time, and what you say has to be done always seems to have it's way around here. NOT ONE PERSON asked to have new blasters hidden for no one to see them but you. NOTHING WILL HAPPEN if we have pages or information on this wiki. Most of your logic is completely false, ie: that Hasbro will get us in trouble if we have info on the articles. I've said many times that nothing will happen and that it's fine. You were, are and always have been the only person to have a problem with this. You boss other users around and constantly have a negative attitude around here. You are very hard to deal with, and if you don't change and give someone else an opportunity to have a point around here, then either you leave or I do. Myself and just about everyone else who has been editing here for a while are sick of you always getting your way, even when it's a dumb reason and it was absolutely fine without it. Go ahead, ignore me. It will be better to have an end to these arguments. Be aware, I will point out your flaws and errors as I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN DOING even if you ignore me. Don't be surprised to see some major rebuttals next time you have another nonsense idea to throw at us. Gage 21:14, November 14, 2012 (UTC)
I know that in the future that reviews will be on separate pages and linked using the top tab, do you think that its a good idea to merge the reviews of all the color series or re-releases blasters onto one review page? I feel that it would be easier for readers to find the reviews and that they would benefit more from this kind of merge. I know that there is a concern of the page getting too long, though that shouldn't be a big deal to readers. Your thoughts would be appreciated on this matter. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 02:06, November 15, 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I recently realised that a wikia contributer has been going around some nerf guns and have been putting inapropriate words on them. This is just a little heads up message because i have currently seen 3 pages containing a rude word.
Elite stock and packaging imagesEdit
It seems like the recent upload of images came directly from amazon.uk, not sure if we should keep this along with the additional information that it "confirms". I am loosely using the term "confirm" as its still a leak.? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 17:49, November 24, 2012 (UTC)
re: amazon imagesEdit
in the past we used amazon as a reliable source for old blasters, more or so in terms of details on previously ? released blasters. These were merely leaked or posted by Hasbro not knowing the community would find them... this makes me unsure of what to do, it still gives me the impression that its leaked.? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 20:10, November 24, 2012 (UTC)
i guess i was thinking that Hasbro was going for like another advertisement campaign, apparently not. Thinking these might be released close to Christmas or in the beginning of next year sometime.? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 20:17, November 24, 2012 (UTC)
reloading and firing-elite blastersEdit
Official news templateEdit
Could you unlock it so that others can work on it? Also you rename it to "official news" instead of just "news"? i added new info to the community template-no link to the evidence, just pocket's word.? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 01:24, November 26, 2012 (UTC)
2013 blasters sold in stores
Not sure if you heard the news or not but some people have managed to get their hands on the blasters (rough cut and stryfle). instructions and internals for the rough cut were posted online, should that be added to the article? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 05:30, November 27, 2012 (UTC)
re: new definition for "leak"Edit
so I guess at this point we need to layout the details separating what is and what is not considered leaked information.
- original meaning: confirmed by Nerf Nation, Hasbro, Officially Reconized blogs
- apparent new meaning: websites selling or setting up preoders
- seems like basic nerf and foam from above have gone a head and made note of the recent leaks considering its from amazon.
- they could get in trouble at some point-basic nerf bought the stryfle and listed his findings; not sure if he should be doing this.
- only problem with declaring amazon an official source is that, before it was only applied to "released" blasters not "new" products that have not been announced.
- seems like basic nerf and foam from above have gone a head and made note of the recent leaks considering its from amazon.
so what i am asking here is, should the meaning of confirmed be broadened to include websites that are selling or allowing "preorders"? an important thing to keep in mind is this: should product information that is revealed by shopping websites be added to articles if the products have not yet been officially announced? just trying to clear up the confusion here.
other unconfirmed leaked product informationEdit
we might as well as create the article with the leaks or create the page using the forum and keep it locked; this is proving to be a problem as continued deleted articles are created over and over again. its not useful to keep deleting the triad article... eventually we will need it. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 14:12, November 27, 2012 (UTC)
Why in the hell are you people refusing to accept that this blaster should be considered confirmed since it is being sold in multiple stores in several different states? This isn't simply a few being leaked out or sold on eBay, this is pretty widespread availability.
A handful of blasters being sold in Singapore is a very different thing than a large number of them being sold in multiple stores across multiple states in the US. That would be roughly the same as them being sold in multiple European countries. I've been to Singapore, and it isn't unusual there for things to leak out early becuse the factories that actually make this stuff aren't that far away (or are even in the country), and some items are slipped out of the factories into some stores. The Stryfe has obviously been produced, shipped to wharehouses and distribution centers in the US, and then sent to stores and entered into the POS system. That's a big difference, in my mind, from someone slipping a few out the back door of the factory and leaking the info on their blog.
It seems like the blaster is currently avaliable on amazon.com. Product features and description is revealed-credit to basicnerf. Would you like to add the information to the article?
Not sure if your most recent choice was a good idea as that has not been offically announced and only revealed by amazon; maybe the more complete articles could be chosen rather than new products as new details will possibly come in later. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 22:20, December 1, 2012 (UTC)
I think that it may be useful to create an archive for previous polls and have the percentage for each choice listed. This way completed polls won't stay on the talk page. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 22:33, December 1, 2012 (UTC)
could you add this archive link to the template? link: http://nerf.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Poll/Archive
Stryfe on AmazonEdit
The edit someone added earlier is correct, the Stryfe is available for order on Amazon now : http://www.amazon.com/Nerf-N-Strike-Elite-Stryfe-Blaster/dp/B009T45XNM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1354506297&sr=8-1&keywords=nerf+stryfe
Since Hasbro has confirmed the blasters, could you delete the full forum articles that have now been moved to actual articles?
also, would you be interested in the new forum lab?
I see that some of the articles have been moved to new pages or redirected and those have not been deleted yet. do we need those blank pages? simple searchs bring up the correct articles, not sure if those are necessary to keep. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 21:15, December 5, 2012 (UTC)
May I please ask why you delted my post on the super soaker page about the scope looking like the real life ACOG scope? Because it does look much like an acog scope and it can give nerfers some ideas.
Hello, I was wondering why you delted my acog post on the super soaker wikia, because it does look like an acog scope and it can give some nerfers some good ideas. (sorry if this is a repost, forgot to sign my first one.
Oh, and another thing I find strange, on the deploy, it got a 6 for capacity, on the longstrike, it got an 8, and on the recon, it got a 10. All 3 dart blasters uses the 6 dart clip so I was just wondering why they were ranked differently there.
I'm sorry about the argument with Nerfmaster8 about those images, and thank you for restoring them. I really don't understand why he insists on being so petty about those. Griping about a SLIGHT color difference between what is posted on Amazon and what is posted on the Nerf site? Really??? Please issue a CLEAR statement about what you want as far as these types of images. I can understand not wanting to post user created images of unreleased or leaked blasters, but not posting the high quality images from a reputable source such as Amazon is beyond silly.
Hey, just wondering, do you think that the whiteout series was just a test or a beta version of the new N-strike elite guns? I mean it does make sense seeing how whiteout had its own darts and stronger firing system. The whitout could have been a test subject to see how many people would like it.
Hello, do you think the whiteout series was a test/beta verson of the new N-strike elite blasters? I mean both series made imporvements to guns (although the elite series did introduce some new ones) and both had there own darts.
I was going to put this onto the trivia section stating that the whiteout may have been a beta version of the elite series but I thought it would be better to as you first.
I really doubt it. The Whiteout series didn't have that much better ranges, although the blasters themselves were made of more durable materials. And other than the color, there wasn't anything special about the Whiteout darts. The design of the internals on the Whiteout series wasn't really different than the regular versions of those blasters.
One thing that I have wondered though is if the color scheme of the Longstrike and especially the Raider was made to gauge people's taste for blue over yellow for the primary color of the series. I mean, the color scheme of the Raider is nearly identical to the Rampage. The digital camo designs also got introduced along with the blue blasters.
not sure how closely you follow http://www.youtube.com/user/Randomshadow09/videos?flow=grid&view=1 who is an author on Nerf mods and Reviews, but i did notice that he has range videos up for N-Strike Elite, Vortex, Dart Tag and N-Strike blasters. Would you like to use those range tests results in actual blaster reviews for blasters that sgnerf didn't cover?
re: randomshadow's range videosEdit
I'm sure that we could calculate the rate of fire based off the video footage, the single fire blasters should be ignored as it can be assumed to fire one per sec. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 23:18, December 8, 2012 (UTC)
wait a minute! i thought that only accessories that were sold separately from the blasters were included in the accessory section? from what i understood, mission kits were included but separate pieces of a mission kit were not. can we get a more consistent definition here? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 00:59, December 10, 2012 (UTC)
sonic and whistler dart mergeEdit
bluedragons and gage have started to talk about merging the articles, while i do agree that it can be done; it may prove to be a problem to add in color scheme, trivia and refill pack information.
Actually, I just replied to a comment that someone else had made a while back on the Sonic Dart talk page. I do think that merging the Sonics and Whistlers is probably a good idea since there is VERY little difference between them other than color schemes. On the subject of colors though, we probably should add the ones that come with the Optimus Prime Cyber Power blaster from 2011, the ones that are blue with a blue head. They are essentially Sonics or Whistlers in a different color.
On that note as well, there is, IMHO, no reason not to merge the two different types of Dart Tag darts, since the only difference between them is the color and the fact that the newer ones whistle.
could you rename this image: Ammo bag kit.jpg to ammo bag (streamline darts).jpg
could you also rename this image as well: http://nerf.wikia.com/wiki/File:DBE1C7335056900B10AFB9CFD36C9DF2.jpg
I just noticed something important, there isn't the NSE logo on it; just the regular NS logo. i think this is a re-color like the jolt and reflex. mind if i list it as a color scheme? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 23:39, December 10, 2012 (UTC)
wait, never mind about that. 184.108.40.206 01:10, December 11, 2012 (UTC)
NS dart discontinuedEdit
should we marked the sonic, micro and whistler darts as discontinued or should we wait until they are no longer for retails? It seems like they are starting to get rare. prices for darts are also getting slashed, just like the NS blasters. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 20:07, December 11, 2012 (UTC)
Streamlines should also be marked as discontinued. I believe that Hasbro even stated as much in that FFA article we were discussing earlier. You can still occasionally find them, but usually only on clearance (like most of the other darts besides Elites and Firefly tech streamlines (for now, till the Elite version of those hit the stores).
Yep, as I thought: " The original streamlines and N-Strike brand as we know it are going to be replaced by N-Strike Elite." http://foamfromabove.blogspot.com/2012/06/nerf-n-strike-elite-info-lowdown.html
We should have marked Streamlines as discontinued a while ago.
multishot madness subseriesEdit
should i go ahead and create the article for the subseries? i already tried to add the info to the articles-roughcut and diatron, a bit difficult to word it in. mind if i reword it? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 16:54, December 13, 2012 (UTC)
rough cut article renameEdit
since the blaster lists the name as "RoughCut 2X4" should we change the name of the article to fit the actual spelling of the blaster? its spelled differently on the package and during advertisement but things do change at the last minute. this is just to be more consistent with things.
could you also rename the images file for light it up blasters? thanks
what i mean is to actually have a list of the sub series released under the years. example: for 2013, there would be the multishot madness subseries listed some where on the page. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 17:23, December 13, 2012 (UTC)
multishot madness logoEdit
nerf sport redundancyEdit
do we really need to identify the sport even though its listed in the name of the product? i kind do have to say that is redundant, could we remove the third column in the product table? sorry if it seems like i am complaining, its just really redundant. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 02:46, December 14, 2012 (UTC)
We need to update the Orange Mod Works page(Nerfer/Third-party companies) because they came out with new stuff. Here's what we need to edit:
1. There are no other third party companies that sell nerf modding products on this wiki, so change the name to Nerfer/Orange Mod Works.
2. Change the Stage kits title to Unleashed Performance kits. You should use the official name.
3. Add these new items: Retaliator Unleashed(Make this into a new section called Unleashed Solid), Silicone Grease(Put that they used to come in capsules, but now come in a tube with orange grease), O-Rings(the O-rings work on the Recon, Longstrike, Raider, Deploy, Maverick, Sharp Shot, and Spectre), Springs (they have springs for the Deploy CS-6, Quick 16, Sharp Shot, Spectre REV-5, Speedload 6, Stampede ECS, Swarmfire, Vulcan EBF-25, Retaliator, Rampage, Longshot CS-6, Alpha Trooper CS-18, Recon CS-6, Raider CS-35, and Nite Finder EX-3(This spring will work with the Element EX-6 and Switch Shot EX-3), Catch Springs, OMW shirts, and the free mod guides.
That's it. If you don't want to do it, just unlock it and I'll do it. You can lock it when I'm done.
220.127.116.11 16:46, December 15, 2012 (UTC)
- do we need redirects to unofficial names? havok fire is the british name, not sure why we need that.
- curious why the nerfer/dart tag teams were deleted'
the only blaster that we have double redirects for non-US names is the havok ebf -25. do you plan on creating redirects for other n-strike blasters in the future because having only one double redirect is quite useless as blasters on this wiki go by the US name. the longstrike and many others have different names such as in japan or the UK. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 19:25, December 16, 2012 (UTC)
we may not need a section on improvements but the information is written as if it is improvements of its predecessor. it's still written in that viewpoint of improvements. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 23:47, December 16, 2012 (UTC)
New Lanard Blaster Edit
While everyone is getting exited about Nerf, Lanard hasn't really come forward with anything new yet. I did a little sleuthing and discovered a new blaster, a disc-blaster called the "Disc Blaster", or "Voltex", as the site says.
Blaster names (outside US)Edit
since you have decided on the having redirect pages for UK names, do you also plan on adding redirects for Japan names? the following is a list of all N-Strike blasters that have a different name than the US name.
- Longshot CS-6
- Longstrike CS-6
- Deploy CS-6
- Spectre REV-5
- Stampede ECS
- Reflex IX-1
- Barricade RV-10
forgot to mention, the distinguish template is sort of broken. I know that you fixed the template but the links are all broken, not sure why. Do you have a category or list of distinguished articles? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 03:48, December 18, 2012 (UTC)
It looks to me as more an issue of people not using it correctly than it being broken. There are two fields there, the first is for the link, the second is a free-form field for the text you want to use for the link. BOTH have to be filled in even if the text in them is simply the same. I've been trying to fix any that I find. This may have been some Wikia update though that changed how those templates work.
Traid EX-3 "ignored announcement"Edit
It seems as if the blaster was ignored by Hasbro just like the jolt due to the since that it would bring in any extra profit and that it wasn't worth announcing. Most of the new blasters were announced by the end of monday each week, it seems like this week Hasbro has relented on announcing the triad. By this, i see it as an unconfirmed released product that doesn't need the template anymore. at this stage, its considered confirmed-Hasbro probably won't make an announcement on the blaster. it may be announced later though... i believe that it was also on the back of one of the new blasters, i could be wrong on that. amazon.uk already revealed the blasters. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:26, December 20, 2012 (UTC)
You deleted the pictures I posted recently. They were not from Orange's nerf page. Orange's nerf page is at freewebs.com. I checked the URL of the photo locations before I downloaded them to upload here. Similar photos are posted on Orange's nerf page, but those exact photos were not from his page.
New products listedEdit
all elite blasters are listed on Nerf.com
18.104.22.168 17:28, December 22, 2012 (UTC)
wiki clean upEdit
I am not sure if you updated all the categories and stuff but its time to deal with the blaster reviews. when do you wish to start moving those to sub pages? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 23:51, December 23, 2012 (UTC)
i just wanted to bring up the issue with the reviews as its a constant hassle of others making random edits to the scores for no reason. I feel as if the sooner we move the articles the better. Could we first just move the reviews, lock them and deal with the standards at a later time?
feedback on the current standardsEdit
It seems as if the current set up works, just split old blasters from the newer ones just for the range and i think that covers everything.
- perhaps in addition to size, we add in plunger type?
- range (renamed firing range): possible to distinguish between plunger types?
- number score should be more consistent such as going to 2's rather than switching for each criteria.
- capacity: this should be updated for NSE and vortex, perhaps a separate scale for those?
rate of fire is pretty much only for the battery powered blasters as single shot is 1 dart/sec. slam fire can't be listed as people fire at different rates, the best we could get is an average or what is recommended.
it seems as if Hasbro is trying to eliminate older products such as Dart Tag or N-Force, the ones released in 2011 are still for sale. seems like the newThis does raise the question of if these series will still be supported as Hasbro has taken steps to focus more on vortex and N-strike Elite. as for the darts, we may want to hold off on that just in case they are not completely discontinued, though i have not yet checked amazon to confirm that they are discontinued by manufacturer. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 01:04, December 24, 2012 (UTC)
Problem with Nerfmaster8Edit
Will you PLEASE tell him to stop posting inaccurate images to replace accurate ones? He keeps arguing about the sources of images, but when people post ACCURATE ones, he replaces them with inaccurate images, just because they come from the Nerf site instead of Amazon, etc. He also claims that the best image available of the new Jolt doesn't look like the real thing, which I can't see what he's talking about. I have that blaster sitting right in front of me.
i want to ask you a quick question: so what should be the purpose of these "talk pages"? Should we allow useless comments about buying or other info rather than updating the article? questionable information discussion should be removed once it has been resolved unless verification is missing.
I don't know if you read my blog post and the conversation between me and gage but i would like for you to take a look. I am really beginning to think that the best way to operate a wiki on this topic would be to create the articles and have them locked once completed as progress made is eventually reversed. We have not made much ground in addition to all the arguments when things could be easily resolved by either posting the accurate info or images. there is no community here, everyone either moved on to airsoft/paintball or are modding. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 00:02, December 27, 2012 (UTC)
the arguments so far over elite could have been easily resolved by either not taking amazon info until it was confirmed or updating inaccurate official images with a personal image. I thought that we were supposed to fix something rather than wait for others? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 01:05, December 27, 2012 (UTC)
we were using amazon before to note "discontinued blasters" not as an actual source. Most of the past problems could have been avoided by giving a bit more time for full confirm, i don't regard amazon as a complete trust worthy site. if you have time, could you split the discontinued template so that there are 2 options? i really don't want to create more templates than needed.
- known to be discontinued
- unconfirmed discontinue/limited production
as for the jolt image, bluedragons had the blasters in front of him but decided to start arguments rather than simply taking the picture and posting it as none of the avaliable images were even close to accurate. I didn't do anything besides posting the packaging from nerf.com.
we have completed current or near discontinued blaster (dart tag/n-force) articles a while back but the constant issue of watching over them has gotten a bit pointless. We can't work on anything if the articles messed with continuous and the fact that people that the knowledge or information are unwilling to post it-they would rather start arguments.
what i meant by fixing a problem: if you can fix it, then do it. don't start an argument on the talk page; especially if the product is sitting in front of you. i still don't get why it was that diffcult to simply take a pic of the jolt and move on.
could we start moving the reviews sometime soon? i hate seeing the constant pointless edits to reviews on a daily basis for no reason at all.
I didn't START any arguments. I merely pointed out that the "official" photo was inaccurate as it was missing the white stripe and the paint on the name, which had been seen in leaked images. I was only able to upload a photo of it AFTER Christmas because it was one of my son's presents, and I couldn't exactly take it out of the package before then to do a picture. I was also under the impression that the official product images (3/4 view with the white backgrounds) were preferable to user-created images here, which is why I didn't do one immediately to replace the incorrect one, until you asked me to.
Jolt and Reflex listed as Elite on Nerf's web site!EditInteresting thing I just noticed - http://www.hasbro.com/nerf/en_US/n-strike.cfm The first image of the slideshow has the recolored Jolt and Reflex listed with the other Elite blasters.
They also list the Jolt as "N-Strike Elite Jolt" on the "all blasters" page http://www.hasbro.com/nerf/en_US/shop/browse/Nerf/Elite/_/N-1rZgtZu9/Ne-2l?Items=48 , but oddly the Reflex isn't shown there.
Oh, I agree that we should leave them here as recolored versions of the originals (I have both the old and new versions of both, and the ranges seem about the same), but I did make a note in the trivia of the Jolt about this discrepency (hopefully to avoid any future arguments about it being Elite or not). What I find even stranger is that they have the Reflex in that picture, but it isn't actually listed on the site anywhere else!
re: Distinguish template changeEdit
Oh, OK. Yeah, I like the current one, but maybe you could put a note on the form that both fields need to be filled in for it to work correctly. It confused the hell out of me the first time, and I'm about as computer literate as they come!
Hail Fire reviewEdit
The last few edits that people have done have totally screwed up the review, and I don't see an easy way of fixing it short of re-writing it. Can you fix it? I only know how to undo the last edit, not several in a row.
Thanks for the quick fix!
since the only difference was due to the reviews, would it be more effective to compile recolor reviews onto the same page as the original blaster? that way everything is in one place rather than scattered?
a fix for the articles would be to include price and any extra info not covered in the original article as those articles would be of no use similar to the re-releases (reactors, bazookas). I would rather have a page filled up than a bunch of stubs where no extra info can be added-off brand stuff, some Nerf. you're probably going to reject this anyways, no hard feeling.
example for the Recon
- Red Strike: price, dimensions, etc
- Now that I have actually gotten ahold of some old Dart Tag Firestrikes and compared them to my Nite Finder EX-3's, I really do think that those should be merged into a single article. There is ABSOLUTELY no physical difference between the two blasters other than the name and colors, and they should simply be treated as a recolor instead of different blasters.
i thought that i already gave a clear example of what would happen or do i need to show you guys? as gage pointed out, the recolors have litterally no extra info besides the performance which you have heitated on. if you can point out specifics that need to be included in the original article, there will be a way to include it. info box info can be easily added as a list to the recolor info. a gallery can be created at the bottom to show the recolors as well as packaging. i can create an example using the reactors using the test template on my wiki as an actual example if you wish.
again merging articles depends on the blaster itself, the cyberstrike and elite strongarm obviously can't be merged but the recolors, rayven (no real difference) can be. like the jolt and reflex that new info can be added either under details or history depending on where it fits best.
on the topic of the off brand stuff, i have gone through all of jerm's reviews as well as buzz bee, x shot and nerfipedia to scourage for info/intel. there are a few blasters that were either left out or had no info what so ever that constitutes a page-blank. if there are blasters that are that similar then they can be merged in a way that is displayed nicely. Please reference the earlier example.
you will understand when i start posting the articles to my own wiki. due to the fact that there is no community what so ever that wishes to keep a wiki database on this topic going, each finished article will be locked. nobody to watch over articles, no point on leaving them open for editing for vandalism. wiki activity on nerf wiki has left me with no choice as there will be many more articles to watch over and i don't have the time to watch over that many files. newer articles will be posted while older ones need verification on info. any missing or inaccurate info can be noted in the talk page and a discussion will be held, please add sources to verify info.
for future blasters, it may just be best to not create the article until full details are known and confirmed; a lot of arguments have sprang up over issues of source, image, info, etc. i also don't get why everyone else isn't able to add info from the sources that we have noted (official sources, amazon doesn't count-its a last resort, mainly for discontinued news). Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:20, January 2, 2013 (UTC)
Honestly, I don't think we will ever get "official" confirmation of some items (Dart Tag products, certain N-Strike blasters, etc.) being discontinued. Toy companies in general and Hasbro in particular has a long history of silently discontinuing production of items without ever actually announcing that they are doing it. I've been in the Star Wars collecting scene for probably longer than some of you have been alive, and they do stuff like that all of the time with the figure lines and particularly with the vehicles (which I'd say are a closer match in size and cost to Nerf blasters). That's one reason I brought up the idea the other day of a "possibly discontinued" template that we could add to blasters that are apparently discontinued (no longer sold in most national retailers, gone on clearance, etc.), but without any kind of official word on them from Hasbro/Nerf.
- I agree with this, since this happened many times during Nerf's history. The Hyperfire, Strikefire, Magstrike AS-10, Quick 16, Firefly REV-8, Furyfire, Stormfire and Switchshot EX-3 are probably good examples of blasters Hasbro does not sell anymore. Hasbro has, since I've started Nerfing four years ago, never officially told us a blaster was dropped, with the possible exception of the Longshot CS-6. Now, with the N-Strike Elite line replacing old blasters, it's probably a good time to add this feature. Gage 15:04, January 2, 2013 (UTC)
we have gotten some info from hasbro singapore, the bloggers can also ask their contacts if it warrents a question. it may not be official confirm of discontinued but at least its verfied somewhere-amazon.
as for the template, see if a few choices can be made so that the template can function in multiple different ways so that a new template doesn't have to be created for each situtation rather an option can take care of it. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 18:48, January 2, 2013 (UTC)
Recon CS-6 recolor merge exampleEdit
The Recon has been released with the following color schemes:
- Standard Colors
- Clear Series: no price listed, released 2010
- Red Strike: released 2009
- Sonic Series: 29.99 USD, released 2010
- Gear Up: released 2011
all size/dimensions, weight, brand, series, blaster type, ammo, clip size are all the same. this goes for all other repaints. ONLY major difference is in the price, performance difference will be shown by compiling all reviews of a blaster onto the original sub article-meaning recolor reviews will be on the same page rather than split, easier to find info. the sub article will be sub headers to distinguish. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 20:55, January 2, 2013 (UTC)
nerf mods & reviewsEdit
i do believe that tactical tag did do quick reviews on elite blasters, random shadow also did a few range tests so far. that's where i got some of the updated info from. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 03:25, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
Gun Creator wiki Edit
I started a gun creator wiki that I would like you to help with. Here is a link http://nerf-gun-creator.wikia.com/wiki/Nerf_Gun_Creator_Wiki
Tops Trump NerfEdit
should these be given articles or ignored? i have seen urban taggers post about them and that was the last heard of this. these rumors should be resolved soon or they will be forgotten. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:29, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
could you add in "MyLastDart" to official sources-its a UK blog that is being supported by Hasbro UK. if you want, we can also add in randomshadow9 (range info) and tactical tag (decent reviews) Nerfmaster8 (talk) 03:16, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
Toy Fair questions?Edit
MyLastDart, a Hasbro UK supported blog, is going to the toy fair and is asking for interview questions with Hasbro. Are there any questions that you would like asked? The following are questions that have already been submitted, just checking if there are any that were missed. 1. What is the fate of Dart Tag and N-Force? 2. Will the Dart Tag Snapfire 8 and N-Strike Elite Stockade be released in the US sometime in the near future or are they overseas releases only?
3. WIll there be an Elite Alpha Trooper, LongStrike/Longshot
Vandalism and nuisance edits by unregistered usersEdit
I know this has been discussed before, but honestly, I think it is time that we revisit the idea of not allowing unregistered users to edit this wiki. It seems that at least 90% of the edits I've done lately were to fix intentional vandalism or incorrect information by unregistered users. There are also the ones that you can tell were probably written by an 8-10 year old (simply by their grammar or lack thereof). I know that it wouldn't fix everything, but it sure would put a bit of a stumbling block in the way of the majority of the troublemakers.
I'm not sure that would fix the problem; you were there, Bluedragon, when Finnpen37 was doing the Nerf Maverick stuff. It's horrendously easy to create an account on wikia, even if that's all you intend to do. Also, isn't that the job of the moderators and admins? To moderate goings on? Nerf is a children's toy range, let's face it, so it's to be expected that this wiki, more than others, will recieve inappropriate material. It's unavoidable.
As I said, I understand that it won't totally stop it, but look, for instance, at the original Rayven article. The last dozen edits have been Jet, Nerfmaster, and I re-adding the discontinued template after unregistered users keep deleting it. I know that it won't stop people who are intent on screwing with the site, but it can at least give them a speedbump. Maybe Jet could just lock some of the articles for a while (the blasters that have just recently been replaced by Elite versions in particular, since that is what we seem to be having a lot of trouble with lately). I would already have done that if I was an admin here. I have my e-mail set up to notify me when articles I've edited get changed, and the first thing I look for is if it was changed by an unregistered user. 90%+ of the time, those edits are either vandalism or sloppy/wrong edits. I'm on the computer 6-8 hours per day, and am constantly checking this site.
I think that would make for an excellent alternative. Locking the newer articles would certainly stop any difficulties. Is it possible to lock only certain articles to those unregistered? That would probably make for the best solution.
I am fairly certain that is possible. Jet just told me that she will consider it if this nonsense of people removing the discontinued tags carries on much longer.
i was only doing the maverick stuff 2 show my ideas_finnpen37 aka jack
Don't you think it is about time to archive some of the older discussions on your talk page? It is getting a bit long.
Would it be possible to some how merge the current templates into one and set it up so that once inserted the template asks for an option? an example of this type of template would be the warnings that gage created.
the new amazon verified one doesn't reflect the fact that there are still retail stores with stock of the product on shelves. the following would end the main problem of how to label products as discontinued.
- unconfirmed discontinue with limited stock in retail stores
- verified to be discontinue with limited stock in retail stores by "source" +URL link
- completely discontinued with no stock left in retail stores
template clean upEdit
since we are using the forum for all rumors, speculation and leaks, do we still need those templates? this would include the rumor, speculation, unconfirmed, leaks i also don't think we need early release for the elite blasters as they were not given a specific US release date-only Australia had a general range of time. it should only be used only if Hasbro announced a release date.
its a new month, more than past. to keep with the current theme, here is a suggestion from the poll talk page.
What style of blaster would you like to see more of in 2013?
Heavy weapons (rocket launchers, machine guns)
just curious, should we do a second poll for the featured article? its been the same article for a while now.
Possible Red Jolt? Edit
I was searching Argos.co.uk when I found a product ad for the N-Strike Elite Tactical Vest, when the photo looked odd.
This image here shows what appears to be a red Jolt and some sort of prototype Stockade. Odd image, thought I'd let you know.
Sorry, but that looks to me like they simply took the image from the older tactical vest and recolored the darts and blaster. I haven't seen a light blue Barricade before (which is what that looks like in the holster), have you? Dead giveaway though is the black elastic bands holding the clips and darts. The elastic on the Elite vests is blue.
LOL, look at the darts in the clips as well, they are clearly Streamlines, not Elite darts. Photoshop fail!!!!!!
I just went to the page for that ( http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Product/partNumber/9089369.htm ), and if you use the zoom feature you can clearly see that it has been recolored (and poorly). Those are regular N-Strike clips as well, not Elite clips.
officially reconized bloggersEdit
so it seems like you and gage have decided to change direction-about section. you both have implied that information that the blogs obtain are questionable to some extent. Hasbro and nerf nation are not going to tell us everything, sometimes you have to ask them one on one. Hasbro knows how to deal with the bloggers-meaning what info to give out as they know it will be posted online. not everything may be accurate but its better than nothing, Hasbro can always change their minds. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 23:42, January 19, 2013 (UTC)
i understand your point that mylastdarts may not be completely accurate or trustworthy as it popped up over night but its just like any of the other blogs that started out. it will take time to adjust, but the more bloggers that we know; more info we can get from hasbro. the other official blogs started out just like mylastdart and grew in size depending on the audience and type of information that they posted. hasbro decided to trust the blog, they got an interview and blog passes to the toy fair event; that seems enough to take them as legit. now they do post about mods but it doesn't seem like hasbro uk cares all that much similar to hasbro australia with pocket.
for example, basic nerf was a community blog until hasbro contacted them to support them with a catch "drop the mod stuff".
it seems the problem with amazon is that items listed as discontinued is still found in stores, this can be easily fixed by merging the discontinued temmplates that have been made and to create options with a default message. you can take a look at the template on my wiki for an example. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 02:59, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
Understood, but that needs to work both ways. Nerfmaster8 has a long history of being petty and rude to others as well.
Imperial or Metric for Capacity? Edit
While just about no one in the Nerfing community measures distance in meters, when it comes to capacity, iSoaker.com and several other major Super Soaker websites all use liters and milliliters. I also find capacity to be easier read in liters as it is less broad and more accurate. Thought I'd throw it out here, when we're doing reviews and whatnot of Super Soakers, would we be using metric or imperial? Thanks, Gage 22:55, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
which ever is easier to take measurements on, use that measuring system. 22.214.171.124 22:57, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
- That sounds good, that way the wiki can apply to all crowds and not just one. I like that idea. Gage 23:18, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
- I'm going to finish up with the Gallery pages on existing Soakers, then begin adding the pages from older series. GAGE 23:26, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
- Using both sounds good to me. When creating a new article, I tend to simply list whatever is stated in the source or on whatever packaging I happen to be looking at, and don't bother to do any conversions. If someone wants to add the other system to that article, fine, but don't replace one for the other.
- Bluedragon1971 (talk) 23:34, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
Why the 'no comparisons to real guns' rule? Edit
Not that I wish for it to be removed, I was just wondering why it is in place. Is it something to do with the law? Or this site's demographic?
since we all know the fate of the NS line and the fact that Hasbro confirmed in the interview that all YELLOW blasters would be discontinued; that covers everything execpt the longstrike. the raider -> rampage, doubt we will get any bolt action blasters. everything else is a combination of yellow, orange/red, gray and black. should we add the template?
it looks like foam from above is posting pictures of old blasters on a daily basis until the NYC toy fair, would you be interested in using those perhaps with permission? 126.96.36.199 05:18, February 7, 2013 (UTC)
new york toy fairEdit
Which info are you talking about? The Blazin' Bow and the Revonix360, or the Rebelle line? Either way, the info came out within days of the NY Toy Fair, and those blasters are all being shown off there (as shown in pictures published by several sites), so I think it is reasonable to list all of them under the Toy Fair heading. You really are simply trying to split hairs by making a distinction there. While the info on them came out on blogs a day or two before hand, they are officially being shown off at Toy Fair. Quite honestly Nerfmaster8, I'm getting really annoyed by your attitude around here and by the way you treat other people.
getting some contradicting info here, different sources are listing different names. toy spy, adult fans of nerf and MLD confirm mega in the name while FFA and basic nerf dropped it. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 07:44, February 10, 2013 (UTC)
Problem with an unregistered userEdit
We just had an unregistered user this morning go through and remove the discontinued tag from several N-Strike blasters. I fixed the ones I saw, but they kept unding my edits on the Magstrike. Can you please block them (or better yet, give me authority to do that)?
I know we've had the discussion in the past about not allowing edits by unregistered users, but we have been having a LOT of that again lately. Nearly every incorrect edit I've fixed lately has been by an unregistered user (I can only think of one case of vandalism by a registered user in the last couple of weeks). While it wouldn't fix everything, it would certainly help some. Maybe we should at least consider locking current N-Strike blaster articles against edits by unregistered users articles since those seem to be the ones they are primarily messing up (mostly removing discontinued tags and messing with reviews).
i agree with that, we had this discussion before and nothing was accomplished-nothing changed. even if jet doesn't lock the articles down, the stryfe needs to be locked. fixed the article multiple times for reloading. in order for you to ban people, jet would have to make you an admin. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 19:01, February 10, 2013 (UTC)
It seems like we lost information through the merge of the BBB articles, not sure where the reloading and firing section went to. doesn't seem to appear in the article history when you check. i am pretty sure that i wrote that a while back. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 08:43, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
I seem to be on this as two (unregistered) user numbers. Edit
188.8.131.52 21:24, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
I am the same person as user 184.108.40.206, how can I get back to editing as that one instead of my current alternate user number?
That number is your IP address. Any time you edit a page from a different computer or location, you are going to most likely have a different IP address. The best thing to do is to actually register an account and log in as that instead of editing as an unregistered user.
Hello there, JetCell! I was wondering if I was able to receive administrator rights on this wiki. I would love to help it out! Although, I'm not asking you directly to give them to me right now (unless if you want to :P), but I would like to know if I could have a limit to reach it. I see that you only have 2 active admins here and I would love to convene the wiki. I'm also an active admin on several other wikis. If you don't like the idea, that's perfectly fine. I understand that it is more reasonable to work my way to earn it, but I would just like to help out the wiki. Thanks! NinjaFatGuy (talk) 21:59, February 27, 2013 (UTC)
- That's okay. I understood it would come to that conclusion either. I'd be glad to help out the wiki, and I will provide all my potential to help the wiki and earn my way to staff position. Thanks! NinjaFatGuy (talk) 22:22, February 27, 2013 (UTC)
special value packsEdit
just found the following on amazon. some of these may have already been noted.
Hail-Fire bonus special value
Rampage special value
I apologize for angering you over this issue, though i really don't see the harm in a surprise for the wiki in general. Hasbro isn't going to make a huge announcement or anything, otherwise they would have let staff know ;) i have actually asked wikia for some contact with Hasbro, no response... in the end, i thought that this would be a nice gift from Hasbro that would be delivered as a surprise that no one else would be expecting.
curious question: if you were to request something from Hasbro, given the chance, what would it be?
i talked to MLD on facebook and he did mention that the sub series is "Nerf Mega X", X being the blaster name. he was unable to comment on the "mode of fire". Nerfmaster8 (talk) 02:09, March 4, 2013 (UTC)
The request that was sent to Hasbro requires no discussion with them, it was sent directly to Hasbro. So besides MLD, no body else knows the exact details.
this is wiki that is free to edit by anyone, that means that anyone could have also submitted the request and none of us would know about it. At least I decided to give a teaser, was planning on holding back completely. Based on your responses, it seems to me like you are REALLY INTERESTED in knowing what the surprise gift is. since MLD's release of information surprised a lot of people into extreme excitement, the same could be said for the secret requests... still not going to ruin it.
you do realize that the request was not just for this wiki, right? I sent the request for both nerf wiki and the one that i created. now if you really have that big of a problem, i can have MLD drop nerf wiki from the request...if that's what you wish.
wasn't aware that this REQUIRED consent considering the fact that no one else besides you has a problem with it. gamegear360 didn't have a problem with it. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 05:02, March 4, 2013 (UTC)
I read recently that you have redirected those articles but the categories have not been taken care off. i highly suggest that those are also removed.
seeing that MLD has gotten into trouble and he was the one who sent in the request for me, not sure if Hasbro will still release the request. i have given out hints and clues to what the request contains, go back and read those. you should be able to figure it out if that is what you wish.
Also ash told me the following: "trying to push offical talks to the wikis". this could perhaps be a way of Hasbro testing the wikis on who actually complies with their indirect requests. I did immediately when i found out MLD had a problem and all other connected bloggers revoked access to the blog posts. i asked earlier but gamegear360 was opposed to what i suggested. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 02:59, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
- I wasn't opposed to that, I was opposed to the fact that you wanted all the articles on them gone at a stage where it was just the one site down. Now that word has spread that this is a no-go, I retract my decision. Sorry to interrupt/bother, felt I needed to clarify. GAGE 04:11, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
if you could find out more information regarding the statement that DarthRambo posted earlier yesterday as to who exactly sent it would be very helpful.
Sorry to keep pestering you over this issue, have you deleted the images that i have tagged yet? we really shouldn't have those posted on the wiki-even if not used.
never mind on the deletions, just checked recently. seems like you took care of those.
please check your emailEdit
references in mediaEdit
Perhaps we should reconsider our stance towards this as it is sort of hampering the expansion of the wiki in general. This seems to be pushing people away rather than attracting new editors here. A possible solution could be to allow it on a specific page or on the forum. Its still interesting information that should be at least kept somewhere as there are curious people on this topic. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 01:28, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
Photo (Slingfire DX-500)Edit
Why can we put the nerf slingfire photo? its the only one we have known, and a wiki goal is to give info right?
Got it, seems a shame though
failure to notify warningsEdit
it seems as if staff has started to fail to actually enforce current policy including leaving warnings to violations of policy. recent violations include: deleting sections of information, creating unauthorized articles. you have given me a warning before notifying that I was NOT staff, this becomes a problem. If staff will not enforce the rules then someone else will.
due to hasbro notifying the entire community to NOT post on the nerf mega topic, it would be assumed that community messages would have been updated to notify all editors.
last thing: i fully understand that staff is busy, but if you have the time to revert vandalism or delete something; then you do have the time to leave a warning-even if its a template. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 21:40, March 13, 2013 (UTC)
Even though locking the original articles prevented those from being created, people are still creating the articles using different names. I have asked staff multiple times, now would you please update community messages with a warning to new editors to notify them. a simple warning to not create these articles with further violations resulting in a ban. i have already left 2 warnings, this shouldn't be my job to do-you even said it youself, i am not staff. why is staff no longer leaving warnings to people? minor edits don't matter all that much, but when something major happens then it does warrent a formal warning. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:09, March 16, 2013 (UTC)
thank you for taking the time to update community messages though i still think that saying further violations will result in a short time ban. this is getting a bit rediculous. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:23, March 16, 2013 (UTC)
just in case people are still unaware of the current situation, i have updated the community news-seems to fit there. You may change it to how you see fit. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:37, March 16, 2013 (UTC)
the number of rumor posts has seem to have grown, perhaps those could all be merged into one thread? if this can't be done, perhaps an archive so the board doesn't get overly crowded?
note: doesn't seem like the initial warning is having any effect on people-still got people posting leaks...i'm out of ideas at this point. this really is starting to seem like this wiki is not sustainable and the fact that i'm like the top contributor of new information (i'm posting it most of the time) besides random people posting new stock images. its probably a better idea for me to just work on my own from now on.
perhaps we should split general nerf discussion board into 2 boards, with rumors being another separate board. its getting a bit crowded.
don't think you understood my point, i never said that i was the only contributor on this wiki. i'm practically the only one adding in new information with others adding stuff once in a while. there may be times where i am in a hurry and just copy from the blogs and plan to fix it later but that's beyound the point. i'm keeping up with every blog and when a hasbro supported blog is compromised or is unavaliable, i have a good idea of what action is required. depending on compliance, it shows Hasbro whether the site is trustworthy enough to trust it such as connecting or allowing access for questions or information requests. as for MLD, it doesn't matter if i got additional info from him as anyone else also could have asked for clarification.
it may not be as effective but maintaining a database such as a topic on this i feel is much more important than dealing with editors who have continuously proven that they can't be trusted. we have a warning on community messages to anyone who has not yet seen it and an additional one on the home page under news; yet we still have further violations of leaks. there really is a low count of people who are active or actually care enough to watch over a wiki on this topic considering the fact that when violations occur staff doesn't do anything unless notified. i'm marking things for deletion though i still got to wait for staff to delete it.
i havn't blocked anyone on ice age wiki yet but that's due to the fact that nothing gets as crazy as this wiki otherwise i would get sick of it. other staff have banned people for practically infinite periods of time. since the last few bans, those particular traits have decreased on the wiki overall. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 20:06, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
List of fictional nerf nstrike blasters conflict Edit
Why do you keep mentioning things twice in the List of fictional nerf N-Strike blasters page? You keep adding distinguish and confusion between real colour sub-series blasters with custom fictional blasters tice. You complained about it when I (I was user 220.127.116.11 before I made an account) added about the Stampede ECS' tactical rails when it was already mentioned.
thought that we were going to start deleting these on sight? rapidstrike was marked for deletion a few days ago, no action taken. really shows that staff cares a lot...a whole extra reason to stay eh?-things i wish i could do but unable to. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 20:23, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
well even if you don't notice in the category for deletions, during a time of leaks; one would assume that staff would keep an eye on recent picture and article creations...
i don't think you remember where that retaliator image came from. some history: urban taggers was approached by hasbro via letter-later all NSE info was removed from the blog after a month. the retaliator image is the exact same leaked image that was pulled, its not the one released by nerf nation. so basically you are creating a loophole in which if a previous image was leaked but the blaster has been released, its okay to upload it? there needs to be a line drawn, we have images of the retaliator on the wiki already. those are not new images by far, the user could have simply used an existing image unless a better one was uploaded.
i thought that the warning you created was for all leaks, including past as well?
as for the user page, doesn't matter. user should not have uploaded the violating image in the first place. i have left him a warning. yes this may be harsh, but unless we actually show that policy will be enforced then nobody will care and we end up where we start. ever since the last warning was removed, we have had constant issues on leaks. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:36, March 23, 2013 (UTC)
i think the past rumor posts should be archived and closed from further comments-already dead anyways. it will also save space, don't need to clog the system. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 07:08, March 28, 2013 (UTC)
we have tried community messages and the home page news but that has not stopped the problem fully. in addition to that community messages is hidden in recent activity, you have to scroll down which means some people don't see it. i have asked staff to see if some sort of banner could be implemented similar to bulbapedia to further solve the problem. i asked because you are not taking the initiative and you don't seem to want to fix the problem. it took a while for you to take my advice to replace the warning on community messages after gage got you to remove it, it was working; similar reasoning with the request to Hasbro. i seriously doubt that you would have ever accepted me asking and you would never have asked the bloggers to send the request.
i think that we need a new board for rumors, to separate it off from general discussion-news isn't really needed as the home page covers that.
all i am trying to do is improve the wiki, perhaps change a few things so that maybe Hasbro will take into account the changes and allow direct communications. i don't see those talks anytime soon based on how you guys treat them. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 21:17, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
it really seems like most edits are either to articles or changing the reviews, would it be possible to get a bot from staff to move those reviews onto sub pages for now?
i am not sure if any coding that you may have added to mediawiki pages have anything to do with this but it seems as if all notifications on this wiki are in one place. meaning that if wikia has seminars, other notifications are covered by wikia's notifications. i just want to ask if there might be any coding that is affecting this. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 07:06, April 2, 2013 (UTC)
non official or personal imagesEdit
any image taken from a blog should be given a source link back, i don't know about nerf mods and reviews but FFA, AFON and MLD do care about being given credit and i think the photo upload page should be updated. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:36, April 5, 2013 (UTC)
i talked to gamegear360 a while ago and he doesn't seem interested in bring over off brand. do you still want to push through with that considering the fact that he probably has more info to share on the topic? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:05, April 7, 2013 (UTC)
it would be appreciated if you could provide an answer to this and the previous message left
I know that you talked to Ash and we had a disagreement on how changes should be made. A surprise is a suprise, you know for a fact that any request to hasbro would be beneficial otherwise i would not waste my time. i do have one question that has been bugging me, even though the request should take time; enough time should have past for it to have been fullfilled unless you asked Ash to cancel it. Hasbro was given very clear instructions on how to delivery the request when it was finished, a bit strange that nothing has happened. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 07:29, April 11, 2013 (UTC)
not sure why you have not decided to respond and simply ignore further messages on the previous topics. clarified question: did you tell Ash to cancel the request that i sent in to Hasbro.
extremely simple question to answer. 18.104.22.168 19:28, April 11, 2013 (UTC)
may i also ask why you are still ignoring the previous message on off brand blasters? a while ago gamegear expressed that he was no longer interested in posting those. if he still feels that way then there is no point due to the fact that he still has info the rest of us don't.
even if you can't forward it, could you at least send it to me? you can use a fake email, i don't mind. just curious as to what was send as the request was for both wikis. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 04:12, April 12, 2013 (UTC)
i guess that explains a lot, i assume that you contacted Hasbro directly? that seems to be reasonable but still don't understand why they only did a google search when they have loads of information on their computers (designs based off cad, prototype images)
if you are okay with answering, did you ask Ash to cancel the request or not? i asked him to notify me when the request was finished and ready, did not receive a response yet-i know that he is on vacation currently.
on the topic of the request, how recently did you get the email from Hasbro's contact?
it has been 5 years, people have tried contacting him with no response. this leads me to believe that he no longer cares, if we modify the images; nothings going to happen. there hasn't been an update in ages to the website. if orange has a problem with it, he can notify us-we can always give credit where its due. images are still copyright to Hasbro, not him. since those images are old, any avaliable would be in the public domain.
oh, i was hoping for a contact from Hasbro, not the PR company. i understand you you have not talked to Ash in a while but during the conflict period, you claimed to have talked to Ash. was there more to the story than simply an email you were given, you are still dodging the question here. i have a feeling that you told Ash to cancel my request.
I think its been long enough. the edits by these people have proven to be completely unhelpful, as almost every single one has to be reverted. thus i request that all newly created articles (n-strike and n-strike elite) be given increased protection levels-restrict new and unregistered users. besides gamegear who rarely shows up online, you are the only one with rollback or the ability to actually stop a spammer from continuing; that doesn't help the wiki at all. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 22:35, April 13, 2013 (UTC)
Unregistered user changing reviews Edit
We've had this unregistered user changing stuff on the reviews, most notably the Retaliator. I change it back but they keep getting undone. I've even left a message on his/her talk page but it is still doing it. Can you please give him/her a warning?
i think that its time to split general discussion up by moving rumors over to a new board, its getting a bit crowded. the news board isn't needed and can be renamed, we have news on the home page. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 23:31, April 15, 2013 (UTC)
Wanted pages clean up Edit
Hi, I said I'd give a hand cleaning up wanted pages on your thread on community central. I'm not seeing anything in the user rights log, so I wondered if you still wanted a hand with this? Let me know on my talk page :) Cåm 14:18, April 18, 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if we could put up a nerf war page so people can advertize there wars on the wiki?
There have been photos of the gun with packaging (There is no way they could completely mimic an official nerf box and the gun).
Joev14, Respect the Green 21:26, April 21, 2013 (UTC)
Block request Edit
Can you please block user 22.214.171.124? This person has continued to vandalise pages, including the Targeting Set. I reverted it but still think it needs a block.
it might be a better idea for now to create a redirect forum discussion and to create the article and have it locked from editing since all the information on the blaster has been leaked onto the internet. i suggest that for the future that when this is the case that same procedure is followed until it is given the green light/confirm. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 03:03, May 2, 2013 (UTC)
just to let you know, information has been spreading around and i think that stores have broke with the street dates and these are selling for around $6 in some places-basicnerf is going to check in south california in a few days at target. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 02:52, May 7, 2013 (UTC)
Speeldload 6 picture page Edit
Sorry about that page I made about one of the Speedload pictures, I guess it's not right to create talk pages about pictures, and mine looked like spam.
What I'm trying to say is: why can't you see the intergrated clip of the Speedload even though its barrel is facing the left? That's where the clip is. So I assume it has been reflected.
Please revert the last two changes by Bryanstein to the Streamline Dart article. those are not wanted changes.
please add this to trivia after this is completed.
"Nerf ammo guides state that CS darts are only to be used with CS blasters, but this is not the case. Unmodified CS blasters can only use CS darts due to other darts having an oversize tip that cannot fit inside CS magazines. Apart from this however incompatibility with CS darts only occurs in blasters with dart posts that are too long for CS darts to fit."
Can you PLEASE block user 126.96.36.199 for vandalising my user page and user talk page? He's not just vandalised MY PAGE, he's also messed with Taylor Martinez's page.
Thanks! 19:15, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
more info on the wayEdit
I asked Mr.K from adultfansofnerf if he could provide more information, he's going to check his knowledge against what we have here. this is just to let you know ahead of time. as for now, you can look up nerfarmory.net for more images. Nerfmaster8 (talk) 19:54, May 13, 2013 (UTC)
Assault grip trivia Edit
It is related because they are LIKE the assault grip. And besides, before I made an account, I added that trivia to the Retaliator page but you undone it and said "Unneeded facts. If you want to compare the assault grip to other grips, do so on its page". So I put it there and here you are, deleting it. What I'm saying is, basically: Make up your mind.
cyber stryke gear + max forceEdit
Could you see if the links on these two articles can further verify information on these two series and the blasters under each serie? rather than have Mr.K work from scratch, i asked if he could check his knowledge against information on there two series.
I was finding additional sources to see if it could verify information on the articles on this wiki as i don't see any references under max force or cyber stryke gear.Nerfmaster8 (talk) 22:45, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
You were mistaken.
Ok. Thank you.188.8.131.52 11:24, May 20, 2013 (UTC)
How do I paste pictures ?184.108.40.206 11:45, May 20, 2013 (UTC)
The Elite Alpha Trooper is now available in Australia, released May 15th and is $29.98, available from Target only.
N-Strike Elite Central App Phone CradleEdit
Hey there, recently some photos of an elite version of the app cradle came out, is it alright to post them? The box photos shows it mounted on the Rapidstrike, which is why I asked.
Joev14, Respect the Green 23:59, May 21, 2013 (UTC)
Attachments with Compatible Blaster listsEdit
These lists take up a lot of page space, wouldn't it be easier just to say "Compatible with any blasters with a tactical rail/barrel/stock attachment connection point?
Joev14, Respect the Green 00:12, May 22, 2013 (UTC)