User talk:Gojita

Gojita, do not remove section tags from pages. And do not replace includes with content. We use includes for a very good reason. To avoid needless content duplication which leads to one page lagging behind the other. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion May 7, 2008 @ 08:31 (UTC)
 * Gojita, I already told you. Stop removing section tags and copying content to replace includes. The Hokages page is not broken, you were the one who broke it by removing the section tags from the Second Hokage's page. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion May 11, 2008 @ 10:36 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's fine and all. But when you do that there is no reason to paste content into an article which was nicely including a section. Keep the section tags there when you improve the article. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion May 11, 2008 @ 14:53 (UTC)

WP Page text
Gojita, contrary to what you believe, when a page is deleted from Wikipedia that does not give us rights to use a badly copied page. Quite the opposite, it means that there is no original source and even making use of the template will be a copyvio. If a WP article is actually deleted, then the only way we are allowed to use content is if we were to import the entire history of the article into the wiki. Though, people often mistake things for deleted when they are not. Most of the time the information is merely edited out of a page or moved and everything is still inside the history. For those all we do is include a revision id inside the template to attribute the revision we copied from. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Jul 13, 2008 @ 03:51 (UTC)

Titleicons
Hey Gojita, just so you know. I've fixed up the system, instead of needing to use: You only need to use. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Jul 14, 2008 @ 19:00 (UTC)

Kira Hachi
Hi! I'm sorry, but I wasn't aware there was a consensus about calling the Hachibi Jinchuuriki Kira Hachi. May I ask where this was decided? I'm strongly wondering why Kira Hachi was chosen and not Killer Bee, as he calls himself in the manga. --ShounenSuki 22:31, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well Killer Bee, is what we believe is a translation gone wrong, beside we need something to refer him to, so we call him Kira Hachi, mainly because this wiki uses western order. But if you realy want to know why and/or settle this, talk to Dantman.
 * Killer Bee is a translation gone wrong? I'm sorry, but I have to burst your bubble right now. The Hachibi Jinchuuriki literally calls himself Killer Bee in the manga (or more correctly, kirābī, the Japanese pronunciation of the English Killer Bee)
 * Any way, I'll talk to Dantman, thank you. --ShounenSuki 22:37, 9 August 2008 (UTC)