Talk:star magic


 * Moved from WT:RFV

Not content with only adding bogus JA entries, IP user Special:Contributions/2.125.74.75 has begun adding bogus EN entries as well. Unless I'm mistaken, all three of these are little more than SOP and should be deleted, but on the off chance that I'm wrong, I'm adding here to RFV. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 20:37, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Add some heart magic and clover magic, and your magical breakfast will be complete! ☺ ~ Robin 20:52, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't forget the diamonds too. :-P  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 21:04, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I've given this IP user a one-day break in the hopes of forestalling their copious avalanche of rubbish. Going through their contribs, it's the exception that I find anything that doesn't need fixing or flat-out deleting.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 21:07, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Using the style like "(a/the) star(s)" is really annoying, as well as " (or around,)". Mglovesfun (talk) 18:33, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, this user and Special:Contributions/90.215.199.167 are both known for lack of knowledge about WT formatting conventions. Or WT:CFI.  Or Japanese, despite adding so many entries and page content for this language.  Every once in a while they add something that doesn't need fixing/reformatting/deleting, but I'd hazard that's only around 20% of the time, if that.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 20:29, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, not to defend him/her, their work is still horrible overall and they are slow to learn, but I've noticed that they are getting better gradually, from absolutely awful to fairly awful. They should be given a break though.  Haplology
 * Remember that RFV is the forum where we try to demonstrate that something exists; problems like "encyclopedic" and "sum of parts" are RFD's domain. --Mglovesfun (talk) 14:35, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Doh, thank you MG, moving forthwith. :)  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Can anyone put forth good reasons to keep these three entries? They look very SOP to me, and encyclopedic as opposed to dictionaric, to mangle a coinage. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:30, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * If the Wikipedia article on Moon magic and the sources it lists are trustworthy, then at least moon magic may be verifiable, and rather too specialized to be SoP. The other two may well have to go. —Angr 18:41, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, whether the term exists, I have no question. Whether the term is any more than SOP, I'm still not certain -- the WP article is by no means compelling in that regard, as it describes what could be any magic having to do with the moon.  Do others interpret that article differently?  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 19:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: improvised words without well-established definition. They can be, say, solar magic, lunar magic, and stellar magic. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:11, 24 November 2011 (UTC)


 * ✅, deleted. Striking.  Feel free to revert if I've jumped the gun and someone has evidence of idiomaticity.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 17:45, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

RFV discussion: November 2011
Not content with only adding bogus JA entries, IP user Special:Contributions/2.125.74.75 has begun adding bogus EN entries as well. Unless I'm mistaken, all three of these are little more than SOP and should be deleted, but on the off chance that I'm wrong, I'm adding here to RFV. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 20:37, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Add some heart magic and clover magic, and your magical breakfast will be complete! ☺ ~ Robin 20:52, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't forget the diamonds too. :-P  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 21:04, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I've given this IP user a one-day break in the hopes of forestalling their copious avalanche of rubbish. Going through their contribs, it's the exception that I find anything that doesn't need fixing or flat-out deleting.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 21:07, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Using the style like "(a/the) star(s)" is really annoying, as well as " (or around,)". Mglovesfun (talk) 18:33, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, this user and Special:Contributions/90.215.199.167 are both known for lack of knowledge about WT formatting conventions. Or WT:CFI.  Or Japanese, despite adding so many entries and page content for this language.  Every once in a while they add something that doesn't need fixing/reformatting/deleting, but I'd hazard that's only around 20% of the time, if that.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 20:29, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, not to defend him/her, their work is still horrible overall and they are slow to learn, but I've noticed that they are getting better gradually, from absolutely awful to fairly awful. They should be given a break though.  Haplology
 * Remember that RFV is the forum where we try to demonstrate that something exists; problems like "encyclopedic" and "sum of parts" are RFD's domain. --Mglovesfun (talk) 14:35, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Doh, thank you MG, moving forthwith. :)  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Discussion moved to WT:RFD. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 21:32, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

✅, striking. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:48, 30 November 2011 (UTC)