Hello! and welcome to Wikipedia! New to Wikipedia? Introduction if you aren't then please read Privacy Policy and About Wikipedia! Please enjoy your day and happy editing! Beyonder (talk) 12:49, 26 February 2016 (UTC)BeyonderGod[reply]

If you continue screwing here, specially with articles about DC characters you'll finish like this; https://thisisdahlia.files.wordpress.com/2022/12/screen-shot-2022-12-22-at-4.04.49-pm.png?w=944. 2800:484:D473:700:8DBF:A0F:8071:B54D (talk) 21:06, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Screwing", "specially", "finish"... Such poor writing is precisely why your edits have been persistently reverted by multiple users. Perhaps you should consider attending an English class and finishing high school before making such misplaced threats. JokEobard (talk) 12:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the constant copyedit of the same article. 🥒Greenish Pickle!🥒 (🔔) 06:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Thanks for the tea and know that your edits are very much appreciated, too! JokEobard (talk) 16:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I know there could be some errors out there that's I why sent a request at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. Again, many thanks for correcting several errors. 🥒Greenish Pickle!🥒 (🔔) 10:08, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, happy to help! JokEobard (talk) 15:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It almost look like you're working that article into FA hehe. Joke aside, FAC process is hell. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 10:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One step at a time haha. Thanks for the pizza. JokEobard (talk) 07:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, are you down of sending this article to peer review? It seems that you are still improving until now after all :D. Thou, I am expecting that they would suggest us to remove the 2 TheGamer sources (hope we are able to find a better source or a book for her alias/pseudonym name), including ref 27. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 04:45, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update:Nvm, It's really a tough process. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 05:08, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see or shoot some fireworks? I sure did. Some of them were big, small, and a little or kinda loud. 172.13.193.84 (talk) 02:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added genius intelligence and use of fear weapons, toxins, and chemicals to the infobox. And if you think they're unacceptable, I understand. I'm very sorry about making a few mistakes on it and I won't do it again. Please forgive me.172.13.193.84 (talk) 21:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm very grateful to have you at that article. The major problem that we could have is I think only the reception section for the FAC and thegamer sources usage. Many thanks for your work! 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 09:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your helpful edits are very much appreciated as well! Thanks! :) JokEobard (talk) 05:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JokEobard have you got any idea what to expand at lead based on reception section? I added something [1] and thought that maybe it would be fine for you.

Also, about this one sentence in the reception section, there's a book written like this "The not-yet hypermasculinity of Leon S. Kennedy is also reflected in the game’s scripted narrative whose approach to gender is indebted to noir cinema. The game’s two main female characters, Ashley Graham and Ada Wong correspond to the submissive woman-femme fatale character couple. While Leon’s authority over Ashley is never contested as she obeys him throughout the entire game, Ada Wong is the femme fatale whose disobedience of patriarchy demands regulation. However, contrary to the conventions of noir cinema and in synch with Leon S. Kennedy’s incomplete hypermasculinity, Ada remains outside the ambit of the male protagonist’s authority." Not sure if it is okay for you that I rephrased it like this [2]. Thank you! 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 08:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! Thank you for all of your extensive edits on the article! I've made a minor edit to correct the prose of the lead section's third paragraph. Your rewrite of the reception section also looks good to me. I'll continue to ensure that the article has fluent and correct grammar - I understand how difficult it is to write large amounts of sourced information while making sure that everything remains consistent and comprehensible. Your hard work is much appreciated! JokEobard (talk) 11:18, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much also for the help! I already told 1 reviewer that I already checked each books at 2nd and 3rd paragraph at reception section. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 11:19, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JokEobard Hi. if you don't mind, can you check this [3]. :D 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 02:20, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, what specifically would you like me to check? If the sources mention that Ada is an antiheroine? Thanks. JokEobard (talk) 06:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A FAC reviewer said this "Lead and first section mention Ada, but sort of suggest she was an anti-hero in the first game as well. The citation mentioning the name maybe clarifies that the name as just sort of tossed in without much reflection of what kind of character Ada was or would be at the time. Might be good to add that or clarify it." 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 06:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that in the "GA Review" section of Ada Wong's talk page from 2023, the GA reviewer stated that her role as an antiheroine should be mentioned in both the lead and the "Concept and design section". I am therefore re-adding it to the article's opening paragraph. I hope this is okay with you.

I also respectfully disagree with the FAC reviewer's opinion that mentioning antiheroine in the lead section "sort of suggest she was an anti-hero in the first game as well." The full sentence ("She was first mentioned in the original Resident Evil (1996), before being introduced as a supporting character and antiheroine in Resident Evil 2 (1998).") merely states that the character's name was mentioned in the original game before she was officially introduced in the sequel, in which her role is as a supporting character and an antiheroine. Nowhere is it implied that she even appeared in the first game, let alone featured as a supporting character or an antiheroine. JokEobard (talk) 07:36, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was also hesistant with that, but just wanting your opinion with this to make sure. Thanks for the respond. I'll link your response to the FAC now here Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ada Wong/archive1. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 07:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! I noticed the changes that were made to the article regarding the replacement of the word "protagonist" with "the main character". I am just writing to let you know that I have restored certain uses of "protagonist", specifically in the lead and concept & design sections.

Firstly, the term "protagonist" is used multiple times in the FA Jill Valentine because it clearly and succinctly reflects her roles in each of the games. Secondly, phrases like "meets the main character Leon" or "saves the main character Leon" sound somewhat awkward and unnatural for formal English writing. It would be like writing, "Albert Wesker is the archenemy of the main character Chris Redfield." Nothing in this sentence is grammatically wrong, per se, but its structure and syntax makes it seem stilted and awkward.

Therefore, I hope you understand the reasons for my edits to restore "protagonist" in the article. Thank you once again. JokEobard (talk) 17:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Don't worry its fine I really glad you're helping me. Ill tell that to the FAC reviewer. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 22:39, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, dont mind me replacing "protagonist" into "police officer" for Leon for now. Anyway, we got another detailed review [4] 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 22:47, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We got 1 oppose vote because they stated that her name that was mentioned at Re1 was unclear, in-universe at concept and design section, and was claimed that the appearances section spends more time chronological stuff and he finds it missing a lot of context. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 08:18, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! I've taken a look at David Fuchs' comments, and have made some changes in the "Concept and design" section to address them. I will say that I agree with David that the sentence "Ada once more assists Leon in Resident Evil 4 (2005), but betrays him to steal a sample of a biological weapon for her employer, Albert Wesker" (and all of its appropriate references) feels somewhat out of place in the "Concept and design section".

I understand that this sentence is present because Ada's relationship with Leon is briefly touched on in each paragraph. But this particular sentence seems more like a plot detail/development rather than an extension of the Ada/Leon dynamic.

I feel as though the subsequent sentence ("Ada and Leon's relationship is further explored and its minigame "Separate Ways", which features Ada as the playable character.") is already more than sufficient for the "Concept and design" section.

Echoing David's comments, I believe there isn't a need to mention Wesker at all in this section. As The Organization and Derek Simmons are not mentioned in the preceding and subsequent paragraphs for RE2 and RE6. What do you think?

Thanks again for all of the constructive edits you've made on this article! Your hard work is very much appreciated! :) JokEobard (talk) 08:42, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to make some changes JokEobard as you're my conom. No need to ask my permission and I really trust you. Thank you so much! 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 08:45, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly don't know what to do address his concern like tense and the appearances section. I need some help rn. Again, thanks for helping me JokEobard. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 08:48, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have just edited the Appearances section to address David's suggestions. Mainly, I have rephrased it so that it is written with a focus on Ada's role in each of her game appearances, with less of an emphasis on the chronology and timeline of the overarching Resident Evil series. Hope this helps and let's see what he says about these changes. JokEobard (talk) 09:48, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I decided to withdraw it since 3 of them have opposed it and think it still has significant issues such as the "overuse of quotes and its synthesis" with their comment "between quotation and synthesis: there's a lot of voices but not really enough supporting material for the reader to make sense of the conversation." per UC's talk page. Once again, I would like to thank you for assisting me. I will put the peer review again in the future after all the issues are resolved then after that I can renominate it 2nd time. Regards. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 14:08, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Sorry for the delayed reply. Sure, no worries at all. We can continue to improve the article based on the reviewers' suggestions for the time being. I guess what they're saying is that more context needs to be provided for the quotes in the Reception section, as it is currently a series of quotations about Ada. Nonetheless, thank you very much for your continued help in improving this article! :) JokEobard (talk) 06:19, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but I feel like based on Jill's article that could be very hard to rewrite for the article's flow. I guess the reception section is our only problem here. If you feel like the article is ready to be looked over again (not now, maybe in the fitire), let me know and we can start to open another peer review soon. I should be the one who will thank for helping me! So, thank you for helping me a lot. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 06:38, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trimmed the reception after basing it on Jill's article. Not sure if this is fine hehe. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 12:04, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Rogue (Marvel Comics).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:50, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]