User talk:Deliriousandlost/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Deliriousandlost. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Page 1 ☯ Page 2 ☯ Page 3

Username change

Hi.

I did request a username change. Yesterday was my first day editing on Wikipedia and didn't understand the signature etc. I have changed my signature to match what I would like to have my username be. Cuse Fan (talk) 17:52, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

re Caps lock edits in November 2009

While I don't think what I did was vandalism (or bad at all), I understand how wiki people can be... oversensitive to these things and I won't try to "improve" the site any more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.78.12.158 (talk) 21:49, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

For all the things that could be done your edits were among the less harmful. As an example of the fallout that can come from humourous edits you could see this article in response to what is happening with the author's Wikipedia article. Helpful contributions are always welcome. We might have a different view on what is an "improvement". I would suggest using the "preview" button rather than the "save" so that you can see the results of your proposed improvements. This message is also being placed on your talk page should you be watching there for it. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 05:01, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

thanks for your help -- -- -- (talk) 21:34, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikimedia does not allow a username which does not contain any letters. What exactly would I gain by securing the m:SUL? Yours truly, -- -- -- (talk) 20:57, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Your account is proof that it can be done. There is also an account on HEWP. You can check the SUL status here. If that is yours then you can have them unified under the single login. It would allow you to have accounts automatically created should you decide to contribute to say Wiki Quotes or Meta. It would also keep someone else from taking your very unique user name on a project where you do not (yet) have an account.

Also, you are supposed to have at least one link to your user page or talk page. Given your user name i have this below suggested signature. You would go to Special:Preferences and paste it in to the section for a signature and then check the box to "Treat signature as wikitext". Feel free to change the colours if you don't like the random ones i selected.

-- -- --

<big>[[User:-- -- --|'''--''']] [[User talk:-- -- --|'''--''']] [[Special:Contributions/-- -- --|'''--''']]</big>

Ok so i read a google-translated version of the rename request on HEWP. All i can say is that user names technically can exist without letters, see User:172 as an example of an old account, but that they can no longer be self-created. Your rename here on ENWP was approved by a bureaucrat who has many years of experience. 172 was not blocked because of his user name. So long as you have a signature with at least one link in it to your talk page you should be fine.

I was only responding to a report on UAA that suggested it had already been reported and no change request had been made. I couldn't find the CHU request linked from the talk page; so I assumed it had been declined or withdrawn and thus merely followed what is the standard procedure in that (rare, as it happens) circumstance. Had I been able to do so I would not have blocked. Glad to see things have been resolved (yes, I'm aware non-alpha usernames are permitted, since after all we do allow non-Latin usernames as well). Daniel Case (talk) 23:21, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Addendum: I see what the problem was. Julian didn't input the deeplink to the change request properly; therefore I couldn't find it and assumed the worst. Daniel Case (talk) 23:25, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Second addendum: here's the original UAA report I responded to, in case you want to go talk to that person as well.

Once again, my decision to block was based on an apparent willful disregard of the previous unblock to change name; there was no record of it or its approval on the talk page or anywhere else that I could find. Nor, as I've said, could I find the new CHU request from the link provided.

Obviously there are some communications difficulties that need to be addressed regarding approved username changes and reports to UAA. But I would also recall that we have discouraged usernames that seemed to be confusing in the past, and since three dashes are not only "o" in Morse code but could seem like a signature attribution to a new editor rather than the actual username, I felt I was within the policy to not allow it. Daniel Case (talk) 23:36, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Follow-up here since you have ~~two~~ three comments here already: As you can see above and from -- -- --'s talk page i did suggest links in his signature. That he seems to have not done that has meant that SignBot is chasing him around the project. I found the UAA report and wow filed by my wikifriend Anna Lincoln (she gave me a Christmas greeting because she loves my user name). Blocking solely because of WP:UNCONF. Well it is in part my fault for never writing in a link to a specific diff showing -- -- -- to be the NEW name.

It is not actually three dashes but three groups of two.

I write a lot and usually revise a lot before saving. Your two addendum rushed me a bit. I see Avi got a note on your talk page well before i did yet i started writing the note to you before i write the one on CHU. As you can see above i even drafted a proposed signature for -- -- --. And i think that maybe the message should be on his talk page as he might not be reading mine.

Thanks again for your helpful advice. -- -- -- 22:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry

Totally not trying to steal it from you - can you try reset request. Sorry for the confusion. 7 09:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

~hugs~

Seriously - you should reset it and take it - I don't want to damage your rep... 7 09:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

You read the comments. You missed the whole IRC part that went with that.

I can't IRC at work (hate that!) but my ears were ringing - I knew you guys were talking about me. 7 09:27, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Your taking the credit was the humourous topping to a very otherwise acrimonious discussion that had nothing to do with you.

username change

You noticed me that I shouldn't use my account which is named "Realidad y Illusion". Then when can you merge my old(this username) and new(Realidad y Illusion) one?Sinuikiru (talk) 15:48, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Renaming here on English Wikipedia usually is a few days. Renaming an account when you have already created the new name can be a longer to do. I can not merge or rename accounts. I review requests for potential problems and help resolve them so that renaming can be done by the bureaucrats. I am going to try to get this done as soon as possible for you. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 16:03, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, anyway Thanks.^^Sinuikiru (talk) 16:11, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

:-)

;-) Anna Lincoln 09:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Participation at my RfA

Thank you for taking the time to weigh in on my RfA. It was successful, in that the community's wish not to grant me the tools at this time was honored. I'm taking all the comments as constructive feedback and hope to become more valuable to the project as a result; I've also discovered several new areas in which to work. Because debating the merits of a candidate can be taxing on the heart and brain, I offer this kitten as a low-allergen, low-stress token of my appreciation. --otherl left 12:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Pronoun issue

Sorry about that. I guess I should look over the userpages before I write those things. Happy Valentines Day as well! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:52, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes i changed the section heading... o my!! hey it's my own talk page and the matter is regarding pronoun usage not issues with one's gender.

I guess this a chance to write a little on pronouns. Most users who have been around awhile do have one or more user boxes that indicate proper pronoun usage when referring to them. Kevin, above, would clearly not fit the "s/he" short cut that is often used; i don't know one girl named Kevin. Maybe Kevin would be offended at "playing it safe" when by his name it is rather obvious. Another indication of the proper pronoun to use can sometimes be found in one's signature. If a user's signature is pink then feminine pronouns are the safe choice. Some people like to use "they" and "them" and "their", even in the face of a user's self-declared pronoun. This user thinks that is marginally better than using "it". If a user is a "they" then there are multiple people or/and personalities using the account. Neither of those implications are too favourable. I know the generally accepted rule: there are no girls on the internet. Here's a little secret, there really are a few more of us than you think. If there is no self-declared indication of gender and you don't feel like there is enough circumstantial evidence to comfortably use a gender-specific pronoun, try using "this user" instead of "they". Everyone here is a Wikipedia user so you can't go wrong with that.

Happy Valentine's Day ♥

delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~
delirious & lost ☯ ^♥hugs♥

The Jane Show

Hey, I remember the pilot episode incident really throwing me off :). Good luck with the article...I imagine there is a minimal amount of info online. I would like to say I can help, but to be honest I don't remember a great deal about the show. I will poke around Google, however. Cheers, Sprocket (talk) 07:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

re Clayton Zelin

I wrote an article and it is being considered for deletion. I gave 9 references for this article hoping that would make it legit.Wikipedia has Clayton Zelin mentioned in several U.S. Soccer teams, but doesnt have an article explaining more about him. He is currently listed under Real Colorado Foxes, Colorado Lightning and Colorado predators on wikipedia. I tried to write an article talking about him since he played NCAA division 1 soccer at Georgia Southern University and has played for New Orleans, Colorado Blizzard, Ogden Outlaws, Colorado Predators, Colorado Lightning, Real Colorado Foxes and played Reserve games for the Colorado Rapids in 2009, how can we get this published? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mscdpanda3 (talk • contribs) 05:55, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

ACC interface

Hello! I tried to take your advice and hope on IRC #wikipedia-en-accounts ^connect, but when I try to send a message to the room, I get:

[00:06] <Avicennasis> Hello. :)
[00:06] == Cannot send to channel: #wikipedia-en-accounts

I would guess you need permissions to actually chat there. (Just you so you know - I did try to say hello, it just wouldn't let me.) I guess I will have to try the form again. Thanks for the help! ^Avicenna_sis @ 05:14, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Rashad bolden

Fair point - thanks - removed. Codf1977 (talk) 10:25, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Can't find an image i uploaded

How do i do this? Also your comment about Newspaper articles for Caesar LaMonaca page. I think both the Miami Herald and the old Miami News have plenty. Not sure how to deal with copyright or referencing them though. ALSO: Where is the jpeg picture i put on the Bayfront Park page, and how do you go about finding your own uploaded files. There should be a tab on your user page to do this. Maybe you can pass this alone to whomever helps design the Wikipedia site. It shouldn't be hard to find! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseph setorius (talk • contribs) 19:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello Joseph,

You are right about something. I did request the deletion of the image that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. In looking to add references to the article on Mr LaMonaca i found that the image has a copyright claim from the Historical Museum of Southern Florida, which is clearly state on the webpage http://www.bayfrontparkmiami.com/pages/history/photo_band.html. As such the image would need to be uploaded to Wikipedia and not to Commons, and it would need to have the proper licensing and non-free media fair-use rationale. You can read about fair-use rationales at WP:FUG and also review the options when uploading an image. You should see the Upload file option in the "toolbox" section on the left of most pages. For the image you uploaded you would want to select historically significant fair use image from the options on the upload page and fill in the information asked for be the template and then select the historically significant fair use (deceased persons or historic events) licensing from the drop-down menu. It also helps to look at a few other images that are of a similar nature to the one you wish to upload so that you can see what information is required. And just from my experience, if you use Google Chrome it is best to check that everything is recorded properly as sometimes it says the file is still uploading but if you check in another tab you will see it has uploaded. It appears to be a quirk between Chrome and Wikipedia's software.

As to references you would want to review Template:Cite web and Template:Cite news for all of the instructions. Here are an example of the cite web and cite news coding and the resulting references.

<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mywebsite.ca/bio/ |title=my autobiography |last=Hunter |first=Jessica |publisher=jAh |date=13 July 2007 |accessdate=27 March 2010}}</ref> ^[1]

<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.somefakewebsite.com/restofurlhere |title=Wikipedia's real delirious & lost |last=Harper |first=Stephen |publisher=[[Ottawa Citizen]] |pages=A3 |date=24 September 2009 |accessdate=27 March 2010}}</ref> ^[2]

[1]
Hunter, Jessica (13 July 2007). "my autobiography". jAh. Retrieved 27 March 2010.
[2]
Doe, John (24 September 2009). "Wikipedia's real delirious & lost". Ottawa Citizen. pp. A3. Retrieved 27 March 2010.

As to finding what you have uploaded, if you click on My Contributions at the top right of any page it will show you your most recent edits. If you are looking for any uploads you will want to select Namespace: File from the drop-down menu. This only shows your contributions to the project you are viewing at the time. English Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, etc all have their own respective contribution histories for each user and there is no one place to see all of them at once from every project you contribute to. The closest to that is a summary table, and here is your account http://toolserver.org/~vvv/sulutil.php?user=Joseph_setorius

I also made the article with the mis-spelt title into a redirect to the proper spelling so if anyone else makes the same error they will end up on the correct article.

I hope this helps you understand. I tend to give broad, long answers to more general questions. If something about this is confusing you hopefully i could clarify that. It looks complicated at first but once you get a feel for how things work it goes fairly smooth. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 20:19, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

No thanks all that information is great. The photo was actually the originally the property of Jean McNamee, and Caesar LaMonaca himself before that...WHO originally took the photo i am unsure of...and i know at least two copies exist. I will try reloading it with the proper licensing later. Or perhaps find another photo. Thanks for the quick help and comments. Would be curious to know if you "work" for wiki or how you came to be one of its "editors". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseph setorius (talk • contribs) 20:37, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

One other small question. How do i get the "S" in Setorius capitalized in my username and on my page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseph setorius (talk • contribs) 20:41, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

You filed the request to have your account renamed. It just takes some time; the wait time is different each day. We're volunteers (no i do not work for Wikipedia, though there are a few staff members out of the millions of users) and i guess all of the bureaucrats (those with the ability to rename accounts) are busy. Some patience is all you need now. DO NOT create another account; they take care of all of that. Everything will be transferred into your renamed account.

I suppose i invited the question of how i came to be here with my fake biography example :P Well i have been a reader of Wikipedia since the fairly early days. I've seen things change, some for the better and some for the more complicated. I created this account after years of just reading the articles. I never used it. I lost the password. I eventually had something to write and i created another account with my less-preferred user name and used it for a little while. Last fall i figured out the password to this account and have been using it since then. I don't write too much in the way of new content. I do clean-up/tweaking of articles, mostly in tv shows and music, as i find the need to. I also clerk on requests for renaming, which is mostly reviewing requests and following up with people as needed and leaving notes for those who do the renaming. That has me cross paths with a variety of people. It is how i met you. I saw the notice of speedy delete on your talk page, looked at the article and thought i might be able to do something with it. It wasn't much but a few references should keep it from being deleted and allow you to expand on it.

Also, you may have noticed you received and automated message to sign when you write on a talk page, using ~~~~. If you are using a typical north american keyboard it is shift + the key to the left of the 1 across the top, four times. Your own talk page is the exception for being required to sign. I'm not going to sign this and it won't be done for me.

Re: a recent RfA vote on English WP (@id.wiki)

Nudge

Request for comment on Edit Filter talk page

re comment on WP:RFA/Jamesofur

Thank you for

"First, it takes no edits to read Wikipedia and find yourself here, create an account, and then comment as edit № 1. Having 9 or now 15 edits and making a comment is completely ok. "

As a new user, I appreciate that.

There are ways to make people feel wanted, which you did, and ways to make people feel unwanted too - good job I have thick skin.

Begoon (talk) 21:39, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. I've been an active reader for a lot longer than i have been regularly editing so i know it is not hard to "wander around and end up at some of the behind-the-scenes". A comment on someone else's vote is hardly controversial for a new user to do. Not voting because you might not be sure if you are allowed to, if there are any special requirements that you are not aware of, posting a comment among other things "test the waters" is most permitted at requests for adminship (RfA). If there are specific requirements to qualify for voting or if commenting is not allowed on a vote somewhere it will say so.

I have cleaned up the formatting to include a section heading. I hope you don't mind.

Here is a quick guide to voting on a RfA. Anyone may comment. If you do not have an account it will record you by your IP address. Any person with an account may cast one vote in a RfA. Anonymous editors (without an account) are not permitted to cast a vote at RfA. If you do not know the user be sure to review her/his activity. The RfA/RfB toolbox drop down, just above the support section, has links to various automated summaries of the candidate's activities and can serve as a great starting point to ones review of a candidate. If you change your mind you can indent your vote and use <s> & </s> to strike your vote and cast a vote in one of the other sections if the RfA has not closed. Anytime you add a comment on a talk page or vote somewhere be sure to add ~~~~ (four ~) at the end as it generates your wikipedia signature and a date stamp. The lone exception to this is your own talk page, which as you may notice i do not typically sign here.

Quick Question Re: The Renaming

re Clayton Zelin (again)

Logo

Hello. I am from bhojpuri wikipedia. On bhojpuri wikipedia I am translating all pages from english to bhojpuri but the logo (Wikipedia- the free encyclopedia) still in english. How can I change it in Bhojpuri (विकिपीडिया- एगो मुक्त ज्ञानकोष) Nepaboy 04:47, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

First there needs to be a logo created. I have now done that. http://www.jessicahunter.ca/img/off-site/Bhojpuri%20Wikipedia%20large.png I don't read the language. It took me a while to find a font that would display the characters properly. If that is correct then i can upload the proper version on BHWP or if it needs changes i can got back to Photoshop and fix it. I'll leave a note on your Bhojpuri talk page too.

Sorry that is not correct. That is totally uncorrect. Please see it again:
विकिपीडिया
एगो मुक्त ज्ञानकोष
If you are unable to understand it. I am writing below all letter seprately
वि कि पी डि या
ए गो
मु क् त
ज्ञा न को ष
I hope now you will understand it clearly. Thank you Nepaboy (talk) 16:23, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

OK. I copied what you gave me. What you see is what i got from pasting it into Photoshop. Some of the characters are close enough that it fooled me into thinking it was correct. Can you please give me the name of a font that works with Bhojpuri so that i can download and install it. The logo was made using Arial Unicode MS and from your response it is not the correct font. I am also going to upload a screenshot of my talk page so you can tell me if my browser is showing the correct characters.Link If you use IRC you could join my channel on freenode ##delirious to discuss this.

I think i see what you were meaning. What my browser shows as one character gets treated as 2 chracters in Photoshop, the left portion of the character in my browser becomes the character on the right in Photoshop. I should have this fixed shortly. I hope.

How about this. http://jessicahunter.ca/img/off-site/Bhojpuri%20Wikipedia%208.png It is still made with the Arial Unicode MS font because Photoshop will not accept the characters as they appear in Wikipedia. Again, if you have a font i can use that will display the characters as they are shown here could you please tell me the name of the font.

It was never my concern that i couldn't read the characters here on my talk page. They did not paste properly into Photoshop with the fonts i have installed. I took a different approach. I have it matching what you typed here however there is some loss of quality but it isn't that bad. http://jessicahunter.ca/img/off-site/Bhojpuri%20Wikipedia%2009.png If this is correct then i can move to the next step of uploading it to BHWP with the proper name and at the proper size per the WMF rules.

The last logo is perfect. Please now upload it on BHWK. I can understand how much You must be difficult to complete it becouse that is not your script but you done it. Thank you so much. I have to say one thing more the font size on bhojpuri wikipedia is small than other devanagari wikipedias. Would you please make it some big like hindi wikipedia or nepali wikipedia. Thank you so much once again. Nepaboy (talk) 09:41, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

If you want the text of the logo larger then here is revision 10. http://jessicahunter.ca/img/off-site/Bhojpuri%20Wikipedia%2010.png If you want the text of the wiki pages larger, that is outside of my ability to do.

I mean not to say larger text of logo but i mean to say larger text of all articles, side bar and tab text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nepaboy (talk • contribs) 10:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

So do you want version 9 or 10 of the logo?

Version 9 is better. please upload it. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nepaboy (talk • contribs) 10:59, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I have been protected the logo. Nepaboy (talk) 11:56, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

RE: de:Our Little Corner of the World: Music from Gilmore Girls

Hello

RE: Change on pt user page

Thank you for your support at my RfA

NCIS: Los Angeles

Just an FYI for next time, splitting the episode lists at this point was somewhat premature because there's not enough content to sustain two articles. WP:SIZERULE recommends that consideration be given to splitting the articles once an article reaches 40-60kB or readable prose. List of NCIS: Los Angeles episodes was only around 13.5kB, well below WP:SIZERULE's upper limit of the "Length alone does not justify division" category. --AussieLegend (talk) 05:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Can you explain why i got the warning that the page was 41kb? You say 13.5kb. Perhaps that is what it is now.

Well if you want to make a multi-season article out of an episode list then you can. I thought that would be unwise and awkward so i revised the layout now. Look at it as an invite to make a more comprehensive season article. With the episode list and the comprehensive ratings it is already more than NCIS (season 1). I realise that the show is not yet lengthy enough (<80 eps) but this will allow the expansion into something more like Lost (season 3). Imagine how cluttered the list of episodes page would get if people were to make comprehensive articles on season 1 & 2 on the same page. The way it was a few hours ago restricted that expansion; now it doesn't. It doesn't look like it will be cancelled any time in the foreseeable future and if its predecessors are any indication a run of 8-10 years is not unlikely, so why not set out a layout that will allow for growth and still make use of what data is there right now? if i had created the NCIS: Los Angeles (season 2) article right now you would be most accurate in every perspective to AfD that or redirect it.

Based on the response here and on the list of eps talk page it seems noone else wants this. O well.

41kB was the size of the article itself. Not all of that is readable prose. --AussieLegend (talk) 07:19, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Just to be blunt, that i guess is true. It is also one of the microscopic nit-pickings that i often just shake my head in wonderment at. That would mean the entire page is nigh nothing size-wise because it is by context, content, and title primarily two lists in table format and a few score references. Imagine having all seasons of NCIS DC on one page instead of separate articles. Per the readable prose guideline i think it would come close to or be completely compliant with being all one article. It would be massively long to scroll through but for the minimal prose it would contain it could be one page. To do the same with NCIS LA would result in an article that by season 2's end would be, in terms of scrolling through the page, rather long and half references. That is very unappealing to read and a pain to get to the navbox after the references. Hence i shake my head at the guideline in some instances as common sense would suggest a page that is primarily a list of lists consider more than readable prose when looking at the size.

I usually use a very loose definition of readable prose, as I've just indicated on the NCSIS: LA talk page but even that only came up at 13kB. A very strict application of the definition only results in about 2.6kB. As for List of NCIS episodes, I was the one who split the article. Despite the actual size of the article being 86kB, strict application of the definition resulted in only 4.3kB of readable prose. My definition resulted in 70kB --AussieLegend (talk) 08:09, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry if i am stepping on toes. I usually deal with cancelled shows. Shows that have long since been forgotten by the editors but for which readers may still be interested in. Reading is how i usually find these little projects to do. NCIS LA is my first substantial venture into a live show. If i could find a compelling reason to do so i have been thinking on reformatting JAG into {{Episode list}}. So far my only reason is continuity of design and i like colour headings to help with scrolling through a long list. At the same time, it is a really long list to reformat.

Since you are the one who did NCIS DC might i ask about the use of Season#xEp## ? Most other shows i have seen do not make use of the redundant season # within the respective season lists. Do you have a reason for it or did you just keep it that way because it was that way? I have been sorely tempted to open 7 tabs and edit it out of all of them and then click 7 "save" buttons in rapid succession and remove it. But with it being a live show i thought that might not be too friendly of an approach. Since you brought up your involvement with it i think it might be a good time to ask.

Using separate columns for the season number and episode number is easier when linking. It makes more sense to use raw numbers than numbering sequences that are inconsistent between articles. "List of NCIS episodes#ep63" is easier to type (and remember) than "List of NCIS episodes#ep63 (3x17)". A lot of editors use "|Aux2=" and "|Aux3=" instead of "|DirectedBy=" and "|WrittenBy=" but I prefer to follow the instructions at {{Episode list}} for consistency. --AussieLegend (talk) 09:20, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

1) Mythbusters ep 106, found via searching "mythbusters phone book".

2) I mean 135 | 22 instead of the current 135 | 6x22 in the two columns "|EpisodeNumber=135" "|EpisodeNumber2=22"

3) My freenode irc channel is ##delirious or iamgre@live.com if you do MSN chat

I rack up enough user talk edits welcoming new accounts i create via ACC and it would just be easier to have a more real-time conversation instead of splitting this on two talk pages. If neither of those is feasible for you i guess we can continue the talk page editing. My doing bigger, one off edits to articles has me cautious about my balance of user talk editing.

Sorry if i tripped you up about signing. I rather prefer the optional signing on one's own talk page.

If you didn't want a featured list all you had to do was say so. When some IP removed what i had put there so far and noöne undid the edit in like 10 hours i kinda took that as a big neon sign that a featured list is unwelcome. I stopped updating the WP copy. My version has so much more to it and i was looking at putting it on-wiki in a day or two more. Redirecting the page an hour ago? I dunno... maybe i will un-redirect it and put my version on-wiki and let you decide again if it is not enough. 06:08, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Huh? If anyone indicated that getting the article to Featured List status was not welcome, then I need to have a word with them. Increasing the quality of an article, regardless of type, should always be encouraged. When I initially opposed the split of the "List of" article, I thought it was just going to be the basic list-type article without much prose. That's why I suggested simply added any future work you may do to the main "List of" article, which could be split at a later time when more seasons and more length was racked up. I still suggest that as the best course of action, since there's no reason why the main "List of" article couldn't make FL status. However, the IP blanking what you wrote on the season page was simple vandalism...I didn't see it because I hadn't watchlisted the page. — Huntster (t @ c) 07:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I was sleeping at the time and then other things. I looked in my watchlist, saw it and noticed how old the IP edit was. I thought both of you would have watchlisted it since my making it was somewhat controversial. Before i went to sleep i had some production and was looking at season 1 specific reception but the reception was not fully written and i was torn over where to put it since it usually goes with ratings but those are so comprehensive they belong at the bottom. I decided to go to bed and keep my further up dates in a text file. Then the IP removes the prose and some fairly specific references. I leave it for a while to see what comes of it and keep my copy to myself. The it gets redirected. Kinda tells me the interest in expanding it is not shared by many people. Yes the cast and production was still small but that took me like 6 hours of googling and reading to find just the right references. Honestly, i have no interest in doing more for it to end up re-redirected just because season 2 does not yet have an article. The sad part is this was to be my first venture into more substantial content-writing rather than merely content-formatting. I have had enough practice at that - see List of Alias episodes for some extensive formatting revision and one of my few page creations. I could i guess go back to ALIAS and cut down each season since the summaries are sometimes 2000 words per episode :P and are almost mini scripts of the episodes.

I wanted to make NCIS LA more than NCIS DC's season articles are. I didn't realise the toes i would be stepping on until AussieLegend pointed out the creator of the NCIS DC season pages to me. Given how much we don't agree on the 3rd column of episode numbering and the within-each-season column of episode numbering too (the 6x22, 6x23, etc. instead of simply 22, 23, etc.) i fail to see the anticipated continuing disagreement in NCISland to be worth my efforts and involvement as anything more than a reader.

I don't know what to say, other than it doesn't matter one whit who created or maintains the NCIS DC articles. You were bold with your splitting, others didn't agree, and discussion resulted. I suggest you continue to be bold, and don't be afraid of pointing out WP:OWN if an argument against change has no substance behind it and it seems they are just wanting to preserve their preferred version. — Huntster (t @ c) 09:01, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Maybe if i get inspired one day a close-to-featured list may just pop up out of nowhere. But clearly that is the standard for not having it redirected.

As much as i appreciate the intent, if i were to do so the argument's counter is that i am likewise doing so should i make an edit that is less than a fully formed article. Aussie wants the transclusion rather than the substitution transclusion called for in the MOS. The disagreements are everywhere.

Though it is not my best work and i am not much a fan of the show and never watched any of it until after i was done but reformatting List of Without a Trace episodes and the tedious comparison of all 158 episode summaries between the two respective pages was more practical, productive, and satisfying than NCIS LA has been for me. I guess what i am saying is that there are other shows i can go back to and improve that do not have the conflict of NCIS LA. Should you wish to improve either please do as i have barely watched any of the 263 eps of ALIAS & Without A Trace. The ALIAS collection of articles as a whole could do with a lot of attention from someone who knows the show and WP policy.

Thank you

Thanks

ACC access

Grab some glory, and a barnstar

Reviewer

Hi, would you be so kind as to give us support!

Sourcing

Since you ignore talkbacks, (which doesn't stop anyone adding one to your talk page!) and the post I was pointing to was a general comment, not specifically aimed at How the Earth Was Made, I thought I'd do you the courtesy of making the comment here.

WP:SECONDARY states that "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources" and "a primary source may only be used to make descriptive statements that can be verified by any educated person without specialist knowledge." As regards, TV by the Numbers, I had already checked it before I posted, at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. You can read the relevant discussion here. It's a blog and is not a reliable source.

Please feel free to ignore this at your peril. --AussieLegend (talk) 12:25, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I would have read it eventually. I'm a reader. I can't resist the temptation to read it forever. It may sound odd but i generally try to keep a low edit count. Removing talkbacks left in defiance of my request is nothing better than two wasted edits, to leave and then remove, as i do use my watchlist and there is a notice that i will respond there if that is where a conversation started, even if another person insists upon responding here. If i don't respond then i have nothing to say. Such was the case here, until you came over to Ghost Whisperer.

Well, like i think i mentioned, that means a lot of articles are going to have issues. tvbythenumbers.com is a reliable, published secondary source. Almost everything is becoming a blog these days. Barring them means turning to the evil primary source for referencing episode ratings. Which is in itself funny since doing so will mean the downgrading of all featured episode lists, something you indirectly espouse due to tvbythenumber.com. Damned if do, damned if don't. :P

As to threatening me on the presumption that i would force the issue, that was most uncalled for.

I swear i saw it somewhere in that noticeboard archive but it is at least my opinion that tv.msn.com is so not a reliable source. Somehow they have schedules even before network press sites release them. How is that not 100% speculation and unverifiable? Exactly, it is unreliable. I prefer the press releases but at least thefutoncritic.com merely regurgitates the press releases in full once they have been released. Since it is only my opinion i am not removing all of the tv.msn.com references but you will not find me using it to reference any edit i make.

Here's a thought for you, the further you get away from the primary source the more susceptible you are to having synthesis, original research, non-neutral points of view, et. al. in what you use as a reference. Only here are primary sources considered bad. WP says "no" to all user editable content and yet each time you [[something]] you are asserting the reliability of what you link to. A bit of a paradox; somewhat amusing to ponder upon. The age of this account does not reflect how long i have been around; it is off by about half a decade. Many things have really changed; not all of it makes sense. I generally espouse "go along with it or move on". Some of the most beautiful, accurate articles i have read on WP are from the age of "optional referencing" that has long since passed into WP history, still now i reference anything that could remotely be considered questionable content.

As to expanding the list rather than the season of NCIS LA, i was working on the season but that was not good enough. When there are seasons they are what compliment the substituted & translcuded episode list. The season articles are the main and the list of episodes is the "see also". So i set up my own wiki for redoing the entire collection of JAG & NCIS articles, as needed. Referenced prose was replaced with point form list. I intentionally left it alone to see what would happen in my absence. In a week noöne else thought anything of it. Then you redirected the page. Pretty clear sign my contributions were not really welcome. If given some time and the luck of googling the right phrase i can write a really nice season article all on my own that you would probably welcome.

That we disagree on so many little things is the other reason why i backed off from NCIS on WP. The background colour of the NCIS seasons' cover art has come too close to repeating in a few instances to use that as the identifying colour so i selected a particular spot on the N that generated a muted colour still identifiable as the colouring of the show title for the respective seasons. Season 8 is my default placeholder #ff69b4. Doing so changed 8/8 of the colours you selected but when put with the cover art they fit together.

So if all of this is a tertiary source that is by nature and by internal policy considered unreliable at its core why is there such a fuss over reliability of sources, why do we link unreliable articles to each other, and why do any of us bother at all?

I am fed up with telling you over and over and over. I didn't walk away from NCIS DC, NCIS LA, JAG, and HTEWM because i lost interest in the shows. I left because i could no longer tolerate you. Logical arguments are met with snarky partial or/and misquotes of what i said as a mockery rebuttal. The irony that NCIS season 1 cites CBSPressExpress despite your objections to the site is not lost on me. That is both a primary source and a site you say you can't access. Your fixation on readable prose has you gone so far as to on the record admit you have no idea about the portion of the MOSTV that speaks of splitting into seasons at or about 80 episodes. Mocking me for speaking nonsense because you never read that section of the policy is insulting to me but to anyone who has read the applicable section of MOSTV it makes you look foolish in their eyes.

If you want to lecture me for personally preferring primary sources then have fun. Once regurgitated = good /|\ fresh or twice regurgitated = bad .... makes no sense to me. Good luck finding a secondary source for tv ratings that is not in blog or forum format. I don't think there are any for USA. Canada ratings are done with a primary source. Ditto UK.

I have been watching the Ghost Whisperer articles for some time now. I only made a few edits but i would regularly read the revisions. I walked away from two shows where you had already edited. Hint hint.

Related Articles