Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:46, 9 February 2008

Archives

1. Archive 1 August 2007 thru October 2007
2. Archive 2 November to December 31 2007
3. Archive 2 January 2008 to

Sami needs sections!

LOL, nosy me went to Sami Brady to check out what was going on, and I noticed that her loooong character bio is in desperate need of some subheadings to split it up! I see you've said it's being worked on, so maybe you have that in mind. Obviously, it would make editing easier if the text was broken up. — TAnthony 01:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I know. I think she does too. I started watching the page when it was being moved all over but now I'm looking at the storyline and it kind of sucks and is in need of a lot of clean up. It needs like a section for the 90s, her marriages/engagements, her schemes. There's a lot that could be done. But give me this, I at least tried to edit "in present tense" this time. CelticGreen 01:56, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Las Vegas

Nobody knows if they went through with the annulment so for the time being they are still married until they clear it up.Bleek25 (talk) 04:30, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

If The Futon Critic is "gossip" then I'm hear to tell you they have the right "gossip" and they have been 100% reliable all season with the episodes for Las Vegas. You still didn't say why now you're jumping in there. I submitted episodes earlier in the season and you never said boo.

I still stand by The Futon Critic as a reliable source for episodes, because they get their information from NBC. Same goes for TV Guide's blogs. They've stated many times someone will make a guest appearence on a show and said person does appear.

James Blunt - "Same Mistake" in the two hour finale of Las Vegas titled "Three Weddings and a Funeral Parts 1 & 2" airing February 152008 @ 9:00pm E/P.

I'd like to point out one other thing. Many users do not believe Wiki is reliable either, since this site too relies of fans of shows for information and can be considered "gossip". Robinepowell (talk) 16:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Many people/users don't believe Misplaced Pages is reliable because of users who continually put up unreliable information. If we were more diligent about bad sources, Misplaced Pages would become a more reliable site in and of itself. Stand by Futon Critic all you want, it's not considered reliable, as you've been told many,many,many times, your edits will just continue to be reverted. KellyAna (talk) 00:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

If the Futon is so unreliable, then why did every single episode for Season 5 of Las Vegas right? Same thing for Gossip Girl, Law & Order: SVU, ER and CSI?

Btw, concerning references, when are you going to re-add for episodes from Seasons 1-4 and the rest of Season 5? Robinepowell (talk) 22:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

It is not my responsibility to go back and find old references but it is my responsibility to keep you from removing legitimate references. You were blocked for your actions. You should discontinue editing in a manner that has already gotten you blocked. KellyAna (talk) 22:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Kristen Renton

Kristen Renton on Days of Our Lives is on Contract not recurring status. She first appeared on days in september 2007 on recurring status. But in december went on contract. Her first contract appearance on Days was December 3, 2007. http://members.aol.com/jason47b/ is a source on this but I've seen this news in several different places. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doolkid (talk • contribs) 23:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect. That is false information perpetuated by a wanna be Days "historian" by the name of Jason (you've put up his not considered reliable source webpage) based on speculation that her name was in X order in the credits. She's not on contract and has only appeared once in 2008. KellyAna (talk) 23:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I found another source that says Kristen Renton is on contract. Here is the Link http://www.soapcentral.com/days/castlist.phpIf this is not satisfactory enough, I will email nbc, sony pictures, whoever... to get proof.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doolkid (talk • contribs) 04:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, just because she's only appeared once in 2008 doesn't mean she's not on contract. Frances Reid is on contract and only appeared twice in 2007. I understand these are special circumstances for the shows aging Matriarch. I'm just saying that one does not have to be on often to be on contract. They put her on contract so they can use her at their will. Just because they aren't using her much now doesn't mean they don't how plans on using her more later down the road. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doolkid (talk • contribs) 04:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

http://www.dayscafe.com/cast.html is another source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doolkid (talk • contribs) 04:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

http://celebratingthesoaps.com/news.html another source —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doolkid (talk • contribs) 04:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/12/30/Northpinellas/Days_of_her_life_look.shtml also mentions her year-long contract —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doolkid (talk • contribs) 04:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

The most recent link I put up with a published newspaper article. That's a veriable source. If you have doubts about this source or want to know where the reporter got her source (she interviewed Renton herself by the way) there is a link to the reporters email address below the article. One of us could contact her. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doolkid (talk • contribs) 04:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Further speculation... I've seen this on several message boards, there's a rumor that Morgan is Tony and Anna's long lost child. Tony and Anna made their first appearance in 2008 today. (1/29). Since we haven't had Tony and Anna yet, they couldn't have used Morgan yet to initiate this storyline. I don't have proof that this storyline will take place...I'm just trying to show her lack of appearance on 2008 thus far does not mean anything about if she's on contract or recurring. Which is an argument you used that she's not on contract. Besides her character was in her hometown for christmas break...my college would not start up school for the spring semester until the end of January...so its perfectly reasonable to assume why the character hadn't been seen yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doolkid (talk • contribs) 05:20, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Rumours and speculation have no place in articles. IrishLass (talk) 14:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

That rumor was not in an article. I placed it in the discussion. I had no intentions on putting this information on an article. I was only trying to make a point about how Morgan is popping up everywhere in the rumor world and she should be taken seriously. I would hope you try to help me verify if she's on contract or not. And It would be okay if you said that rumors without reliable sources have no place here. But you got on to me for placing a rumor on article when I did no such thing. I expect you to not get on to me for things I did not do.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Doolkid (talk • contribs) 19:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Doolkid (talk) 23:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I didn't "get you" for anything. At the end of each comment is a signature, check that before accusing, please. KellyAna (talk) 00:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

That comment was not directed to you, it was directed towards IrishLass as it was in a response to her comments right above. I know your User talk page isn't the place to respond. But IrishLass commented on my comments to you on your page and I was just continuing the conversation. It was fairly obvious that those comments were directed to IrishLass. She was the one who comment that rumors and speculations have no place here and I was responding to her. I did not once say your name in that comment when I defended myself against her getting on to me. Please fully understand that context of the comment before accusing me of accusing you. Thanks! Doolkid (talk) 05:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I suggest next time you use a name and the bold feature (i.e. Doolkid) when replying to someone. I causes far less confusion in the long run. KellyAna (talk) 05:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

KellyAnaI just want offer my apologies for any trouble I may have stirred up. Please refer to my detailed comments on days of our lives cast page. Thank you.Doolkid (talk) 00:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Las Vegas Guest Stars list

I am only using imdb to look up episode then i am using the dvds box set i own to verify the name. which they match. Tj21 (talk) 04:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC) TJ21

Two problems, IMDB isn't reliable source and the DVD box is OR, Original Research. Making so many unsourced changes is problematic. Just go slower and people will be less wary of what you are doing. I have no doubt you are making legitimate edits but you need sources and references. KellyAna (talk) 04:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

okay gotcha, i'll remember that in the future. thanks for the information. Tj21 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Las Vegas Production

Oh, I didn't know there was a spot in the infoboxes for that. Should we include the executive producers also. I noticed several sites include both production companies and producers. Here are the names if you want to add them: Gary Scott Thompson, Matt Pyken, Kim Newton, Justin Falvey & Darryl Frank. Those came off of NBC.com, I'll leave it up to you on rather or not to add them, I'm busy on another site. Anymore issue's with Robin? Thanks DJS--DJS24 (talk) 02:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes and Yes. Yes, we should include them, that's why I went and brought the whole template over. I didn't mean to maliciously remove your edits, I thought the field was filled in but the Vegas box was missing it. I think any field we can fill in makes the box look better. There's co-producers and executive producers. Fill them in as appropriate would be my opinion. As for Robin, constant!! She loves to remove citation request, valid sources, et al. KellyAna (talk) 02:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

No Problem, let me know if you need help with the infobox or consensus/my opinon on the Robin issue.--DJS24 (talk) 02:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Montgomery Gent

Okay for the second time, yes there were in that episode, I saw it, even if you didn't. Since you won't believe me, go over to TV.com and look it up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinepowell (talk • contribs) 03:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

First, their name is Montgomery GentRY. It stands for Eddie Montgomery and T-roy Gentry. You seem to completely not understand that the citation request is for them being in that SPECIFIC episode. If you can't prove it, remove it. Yes, they guest starred this season but you have NO proof which episode. KellyAna (talk) 04:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

My User Name

Hello, I'd be happy to explain how I made up my username. See, One of my favorite television shows is One Life to Live, so what I did to make my username was take the abbreviation (OLTL) and use the numbers off of a telephone keypad. For example, the letter "O" appears on the number "6", "L" on the number "5", etc. The last four numbers come from the year in which I began watching, 2002. I know this sounds a little silly, and possibly confusing, but I can change my user name if it is required. 65852002o (talk) 01:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

That's at least a good explanation that I understand. My sister in law uses 2337 at the end of whatever user name she chooses for whatever site. 2337 spells BEER. So, I get it. Not a problem. Just wanted to make sure there was a reason since Misplaced Pages likes for there to be a reason. Happy editing!! KellyAna (talk) 01:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

CASINO IN MACAU CHINA=

sex lies and lamaze episode: 1. the buddist statue and chinese theme is to attract chinese investestor in order to build a casino in MACAU,CHINA. In order ot get into macau needed chinese investors. So he takes them out personally. 1. it is shown him taking them out. 2. at the start of the episode danny and mike talk about it and how its a great move for cooper to do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.11.200.66 (talk) 04:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC) ITS NOTS A POV ITS FACT GO WATCH THE EPISODE ON NBC.COM/ they mention IT! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.11.200.66 (talk) 04:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for helping me understand the difference between the cast members. I am sorry for my mistake. Have a great weekend. AsTheWorldTurnsFan4Life (talk) 15:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Just try not to jump the gun too much. KellyAna (talk) 16:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Aj Cooper

okay when a guy says he played COLLEGE BALL it means he played for his college. Its a slang term. There is a difference between playing pick up games and COLLEGE BALL. Tj21 (talk) 16:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not. He said "he played in college" and for someone his age, there's a big difference. Maybe for a 21 year old it's slang, but AJ Cooper isn't a 21 year old. KellyAna (talk) 16:08, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: References

It's a dead link. Wikipedian 05:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not. This is the link you keep removing and it's working just fine. KellyAna (talk) 05:09, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

My bad. It's just me, I've asked 2 others Wikipedians (Pumpmeup n' Master of Puppets) n' they said the link's workin' fine. I apologize. Wikipedian 06:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

It's also a blog, as their own "About us" testifies. "TV Fodder is an oft-updated blog featuring TV news, features, reviews, commentary and any other TV-related stuff we can throw together." Pairadox (talk) 05:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

It is a past story that's true. How do we go about balancing? The sites been around for 8 years. This person was removing the link as broken when it isn't. I've never heard of tvfodder.com. I know TVGuide.com has gone to this "blog" format so it's getting muddy in the waters, you know. You tell me. The facts are accurate as James Caan and Nikki Cox did leave Las Vegas (TV series). My returning it was based on its correctness of facts. His/her removal was based on the false information that it was a broken link. KellyAna (talk) 05:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

This is also a thread on the article's talk page. I suggest that the appropriateness of the source be discussed there, so it's easier for others to see and participate. Pairadox (talk) 05:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I replied there with essentially the same thing I said here. Should it go to that page where sources are discussed? Sorry, I found it once and didn't put it on my watch list so I don't know how to find it again. You know the page, you contribute to it (so I should probably not be lazy and just check your contributes, shouldn't I =) now). I'll wait for others. The Las Vegas article can get nasty, we'll see what others say. KellyAna (talk) 05:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, missed this earlier. The page is located at WP:RS/N (Reliable Sources/Noticeboard), if I understand your question correctly, but I'm not sure that's necessary at this point. Pairadox (talk) 19:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not necessary for the previous issue but I like to have the info available so, thank you. KellyAna (talk) 19:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. One suggestion I have for the Project, if it hasn't been done already, is to discuss and compile a list of consensus-based reliable sources and a list of unreliable sources. That would provide a handy reference for established editors and a place to refer new editors, as well as diminishing the need to go over the reliability questions again and again. Pairadox (talk) 19:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

First off lady

Calm down, because you are not correct it doesn't and shouldn't take years for a characters to get notable. Second off this is only you and IrishLass's opinion if you have a problem bring it to the Project page, until then please refrain (is that a better term) from doing things as you see fit wait until a concensus happens, are we clear?--KingMorpheus (talk) 22:27, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

First off lady? Take your attitude and your insults off my page. End of discussion before it starts. I'll be glad to nominate the article for deletion. Not a problem. It's already been deleted once, did you even know that, which is why it was redirected (which is in accordance with the soap project) I'm sure it can be deleted again. Before it was a speedy delete, I'll just nominate now for a full delete. By the way, talk to me like this again and you will be reported for gross incivility. KellyAna (talk) 22:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC):

Talk to you like what tell you to calm down, and try to catch your ear in a brash way because you know you wouldn't listen to me anyway because you are dead set on what you believe in? Am I right or am I wrong? If I'm wrong report me then.--KingMorpheus (talk) 22:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Article's nominated. Nothing you can say or do now. Your behavior is noted. KellyAna (talk) 22:43, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Las Vegas

Danny belived Delinda when she said that they were still married at the annulment party.You should watch the episodes before. you make edits.Bleek25 (talk) 23:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I did, three times. She said "they're still married" and he said "Really? Noooooo!" We've discussed it on the talk page, you should see there before making edits that remove VERIFIED information. KellyAna (talk) 23:05, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

You did't watch the episode.After delinda told danny that they were still married he said "cooper is going to be pissed" and then she said" but mike and piper aren't".Bleek25 (talk) 15:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I've waited a week, still no references for the rest of the episodes. Where are they? You're the one who insisted past episodes still need a reference, so what's taking so long to add them? Robinepowell (talk) 21:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not my job to go back and find references, it's only my responsibility to make sure what is put there now that I'm here is correct and referenced. Your comments are uncivil and grounds for being reblocked. You've been warned about this, you should heed the warnings. KellyAna (talk) 23:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

It helps Misplaced Pages to add reliable references. It hurts Misplaced Pages to remove them. The fact that there are thousands and thousands of articles that are unverified or undersourced is a problem, not a rationale for removal of references. WP:V is one of our three core policies. Yet, I have now seen quite a few post by you where your logic is along the lines of "well since other things aren't fully referenced" or "since you haven't referenced these things" that means references can/should be removed. That argument is the equivalent of saying "This street has a lot of litter on it, therefore I should be allowed to litter". Actually, it's worse than that. Since the references already exist what you're doing is reaching into garbage cans and strewing litter on a street that was already cleaned up. Your haranguing of Kellyana here to add references fits in this analogy well too. She's another pedestrian on the same littered street. You're now bothering here because she hasn't cleaned up the communal street? Please stop this whole illogical line of attack. You obviously care about the articles you are involved with. If you just keep a few of our policies in mind, which keeps this place a reliable encyclopedia and not something else, you will avoid all these arguments and drama.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:35, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

IP harrassment

If it happens again, let me know, or post at WP:ANI, and your talk page can be semi-protected to stop IPs editing it for a while. --Stephen 01:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. KellyAna (talk) 01:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Source Question

Have you ever heard of the site http://www.afterelton.com/blog? I have someone using it as a source, to reference a pretty big statement. With the statement being as big as it is, I want to make sure it's a reliable source. I'm only asking you because you clearly know TV and I haven't heard of the site before. It looks like a blog(unreliable) to me. Thanks DJS--DJS24 (talk) 04:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Definitely an unreliable blog. Interesting for sure, but still a blog which is first and foremost unreliable. KellyAna (talk) 23:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I just saw this, so I'm late butting in. But blogs from commentators/critics/editors known as reliable in their field from websites that are considered reliable are allowed on Misplaced Pages, sort of like this blog from TV Guide. AfterElton.com is a reliable source, as is AfterEllen.com, of course (a source that I use often). Sarah Warn's blogs, of AfterEllen.com, for instance, would be considered reliable. Just wanted to point that out. Flyer22 (talk) 05:47, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree with that statement. I work around TV sites often, and I have never heard of that site until days ago. I'll let others reply. Thanks DJS--DJS24 (talk) 16:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:AN3.

Right you are... sorry about that. I've blocked him for 55 hours. · AndonicO 02:47, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Bless you for pointing it out. :) · AndonicO 02:53, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

...for this. Seems like you incurred his wrath ... is this the first time? Daniel Case (talk) 03:28, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I have some IP that keeps violating my page but this tweedle seems to be new. A 24 hour block seems rather short for his violations, don't you think? KellyAna (talk) 03:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

He's a sock of User:Seancarlin84, who's evidently tweaked off that I declined his unblock, then protected his page when he came back with another, frivolous request right afterwards. If you look at his history you'll see why he's been blocked indefinitely. Daniel Case (talk) 05:56, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Warnings

See WP:WARN for user warnings. Compwhiz II_(Contribs) 02:31, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. KellyAna (talk) 02:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

las vegas maloof brothers cameos

kelly:

the maloof brothers are the owners of the palms casino and sacremento nba teams. Two of the four brothers appear at the time. But sometimes only one of the four appear. ALL the time they are appear as themselves. In the episode with the lucky homeless guy for instance only one of the four brothers was shown as HIMSELF. 35.11.200.66 (talk) 02:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)