This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Alex 21 (talk | contribs) at 08:06, 2 December 2018 (Reverted 1 edit by Hijiri88 (talk): "Please be careful about what you say to people." Yes, they can. Do not post on my talk page unless it is an actual discussion. (TW)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 08:06, 2 December 2018 by Alex 21 (talk | contribs) (Reverted 1 edit by Hijiri88 (talk): "Please be careful about what you say to people." Yes, they can. Do not post on my talk page unless it is an actual discussion. (TW))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)TPS: 112 Home Talk Userboxes Scripts Sandbox 1 | DW | Module: / Sandbox TV Shows Notes Contributions Subpages Uploads
Archives |
no archives yet (create) |
|
Returning the Favor
Hey AlexTheWhovian,
I was hoping you might do me a favor and take a look at the most recent edit over at the article Returning the Favor. Another editor has consistently attempted to remove an entire section of the article regarding accolades/awards that the series has received. The awarding organization "Got Your 6" has partnered with various entertainment companies such as 21st Century Fox, NBCUniversal, CBS, HBO, Viacom and Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Lionsgate, A+E Networks, Live Nation Entertainment, UTA, 44 Blue, The Ebersol Lanigan Company, DreamWorks Animation, Endemol Shine North America, and Valhalla Entertainment. The awarding event was reported on by Variety as seen here: https://variety.com/2017/tv/news/got-your-6-veterans-the-gifted-disjointed-1202607620/. The other editor has argued that the paragraph/section of the article should be removed and cited General Notability Guidelines and Undue Weight as an issue. I may be in the wrong here but I am of the belief that the information warrants mentioning in the article given the stature of the organization within the entertainment industry and the fact that the awards event was covered by a major publication (being Variety). I don't know...maybe give the article and its edit history a look and let me know what you think. Worth noting that I've created an article for the organization here: Got Your 6. – BoogerD (talk) 05:41, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
- BoogerD, first off, I would recommend posting that paragraph on the talk page for the opposing editor. -- Alex 06:54, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
American Horror Story dates
In the episode articles for American Horror Story: Apocalypse, editors have assumed that because part of the season takes place in October 2021 (evidenced by a character saying that an email sent on October 20, 2021 was sent a week ago
and the next episode was set on Halloween no more than a few days later), an earlier event (a nuclear missile hit LA starting the titled Apocalypse) must have taken place in early 2020 as the the show says the 2021 events took place 18 months after the bomb hit. They also assume that flashbacks must have taken place in 2017 as these events are described by the show as being three years before the bomb
. What I'm asking is if these assumptions are OR or not? As I believe you don't watch the show, I hope I've explained the situation clearly enough. TedEdwards 14:20, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
- TedEdwards, I don't, I only edit the articles to keep my partner up to date, as she watches it. If you have to put "assume" in your sentence, then it's textbook OR. To include content about the nuclear missile occurring in 2020, a source needs to explicitly state this. Same for the flashbacks. Cheers. -- Alex 23:22, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Slander against you
There was an edit by an anon reverted by another anon on Kerblam! very recently which basically said something horrid about you by name. That anon needs serious blocking and investigating to see if it's someone we know hiding behind the address. Unlikely they'd be that stupid but you never know. Good hunting. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 20:27, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
- ZarhanFastfire, thanks for the heads up. I've had a bit of that recently and I think it's the same editor; take a look at the history of my talk page and the three edits I reverted by the two redlinked-users. To be honest, I'm not overly worried about it; giving them attention is what they want, so I just revert and go on my merry way. All the best! -- Alex 01:59, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- It's now persistent and by multiple IPs. We need protection. I assume you can do this? ZarhanFastfire (talk) 07:56, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- ZarhanFastfire, not myself, but I've requested page protection. Cheers. -- Alex 07:59, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- Good because I need to go to bed. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 08:01, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- ZarhanFastfire, not myself, but I've requested page protection. Cheers. -- Alex 07:59, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- It's now persistent and by multiple IPs. We need protection. I assume you can do this? ZarhanFastfire (talk) 07:56, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
The Gifted (season 2)
Sorry I missed that I was reverting the edit summary and thanks for catching that. I thought I was reverting only the reference to Ken Kirby, which I could not find a reference for as an actor or character in the series. A stunt person is listed as portraying the character(?) in the IMDB which is rather curious so I am may have missed something there too. Donner60 (talk) 02:35, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
- Donner60, no problems. If that remains unsourced, then sure, you can remove it. I thought I was reverting only the summary-revery, my bad. -- Alex 03:05, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- I meant the plot summary; I think you realized that. I should stay away from that article! I seem to stumble over every time I touch it or write about it! Thanks again. Donner60 (talk) 03:38, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Category:Locations based on Doctor Who has been nominated for discussion
Category:Locations based on Doctor Who, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bondegezou (talk) 14:07, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Trivial
I added the source for other IP's sentence. Is it still not enough to stay on the page? Sebastian James (talk) 23:28, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- Sebastian James, see the article. -- Alex 23:28, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- Pardon me, you are too fast or I am too slow. Sebastian James (talk) 23:30, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Sourcing Episode Tables
Hi Alex,
I was wondering if you might take a look at a discussion (see here Misplaced Pages:Teahouse#Secondary sources on episode lists) that I've been pulled into in the last two days. An editor recently removed an episode table from an article I was working on citing a lack of sourcing. However, in the last year-and-a-half of serious editing I've been doing on here, I've been led to believe that such sourcing of titled, directors, writers, and airdates were unnecessary if the episodes of said series have already aired or been released. The two editors engaged in the discussion have stated that this is not the case so I am hoping if you, and potentially other in the WP:TV community might be able to help here. Thanks, BoogerD (talk) 04:04, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Apologies
If it’s worth anything, I’d like to apologize for my conduct during our Dracula discussion. Regardless of whatever was bugging me at that moment it wasn’t something you deserved to have get put on you. You were absolutely right to move it back to draftspace. And it’ll remain there until filming can be sourced. Sorry again, and hopefully I can be civiler in any future discussions. Rusted AutoParts 04:43, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
- Rusted AutoParts, no problems. Apologies for my accusations as well, they weren't in overly good faith. All the best. -- Alex 04:51, 30 November 2018 (UTC)