Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:14, 3 June 2012

Archives

/Archives/2006 /Archives/2007 Sorry, no posts from year 2008! /Archives/2009 /Archives/2010 /Archives/2011/1 Template:•w /Archives/2011/2 Template:•w /Archives/2011/3 /Archives/2012/1 Template:•w /Archives/2012/2 Template:•w /Archives/2012/3

This page has archives. Sections older than 75 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Welcome!

Hello, George Ho/Archives/2013/1, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Alhutch 16:16, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Gillian Andrassy

You should keep an eye on this redirect if it's not on your watchlist already. User:708heytony has restored it twice now, once as an IP and then under the 708heytony user name. Flyer22 (talk)

You seem to be an expert on Cheers and Fraiser I need help

Now I have in recent years added very basic third person information on Sam Malone and other Cheers members. You expanded and improved the articles to a level I could never dream of or be able to. I think the episode Goodnight, Seattle is notable and could do with some improvement and expansion.Dwanyewest (talk) 20:13, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Krystal Carey

George, are you responsible for User:Fastily deleting the Krystal Carey article? If so, exactly what state was this article in before it was deleted? Last time I looked at that (former) article (maybe a year ago, at the beginning of 2011 maybe), I did not see so little material in it that it merited Misplaced Pages:CSD#A1. If this article was tagged for some type of deletion, the WP:SOAPS project should have been notified. Right now, since the article is no more, some of the material that was in it should at least be merged to List of All My Children characters, because this was no minor character, and Krystal Carey Chandler should redirect to Krystal Carey. Flyer22 (talk) 06:03, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't request that, and I'm not solely responsible for its deleted. I just merely requested {{copyvio-revdel}}, that's all. I don't know how it got deleted as A1 criteria. I'll ask for undeletion at WP:REFUND. --George Ho (talk) 06:08, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for explaining. We should probably ask Fastily why it was deleted first. Flyer22 (talk) 06:14, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Want to sign up for this?

Misplaced Pages:HighBeam/Applications It would mean full access to many publications which are now hard to work with because pay-per-view limits what we're able to view re: information. There's probably a lot of soap opera information in the newspapers that we can't fully read now. We hope (talk) 18:21, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Flyer22

George, I saw you posted there. I was tempted to post myself, but I decided there was already enough confusion there. I think it's best to leave the situation to users with tools, like Amalthea, who's already aware of the situation. There's not much to gain by posting in such a confused situation, as far as I can see. All I'd be able to do is speculate, anyway, and that's not useful. This is just FYI, by the way, I'm not asking you to do/undo or not do anything... :-) Begoon  06:37, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Chin Ho head shot.jpg

Feel free to delete the image from the article. -Nv8200p talk 13:54, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Why I removed your thread at AN

George, there's a lot of Checkuser stuff we can't see, a lot of personal stuff that's been revdel'd, and some really strong emotions involved. I really, really don't think this is a matter for AN, or even an individual admin to review. I suggest this be closed, and a note be left on Flyer's talk page to contact WP:BASC. This seems above our (admins in general) paygrade.

Do yuo mind if I take that approach instead? --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:43, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

No, I don't mind. In fact, just be bold about this. Let me know if you want me to add that notice back in WP:AN. In fact, I don't know how to address this professionally there. --George Ho (talk) 00:48, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks, I'll add a note to Flyer's talk page, and suggest we don't post to WP:AN. Thanks for caring. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:51, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

To clarify (I saw your post to Flyer's talk page), I don't think "we" should take it to BASC, I think Flyer and/or her family member should take it to BASC. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:10, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

George - thank you for that. It really is best for us not to try to "address" this at all, right now. We don't have all the facts, and a discussion on a "drama board" could do real damage if personal information is involved. All we could do would be to speculate, and that isn't going to help right now.

What's important is not to do anything that might hurt or embarrass anyone, and the best way we can help Flyer is to hope she contacts BASC as recommended. Hopefully that way the situation will get resolved professionally, as you (and everyone) desire.

Thanks for helping the situation. Begoon  01:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Folks, just to let you know I have also been advising the "family member" IP editor to contact WP:BASC rather than taking it to various Talk pages. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 01:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Princess Irene of the Netherlands

Hello! Your submission of Princess Irene of the Netherlands at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Ishtar456 (talk) 19:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Some photos you might like to see and use

• File:Rod Serling dictating script 1959.jpg
• File:Rod Serling relaxing at home 1959.JPG
• File:Rod Serling with daughters 1959.jpg
• File:Rod and Carol Serling at home 1959.jpg
• File:Rod Serling Inger Stevens Serling model airplane collection 1960.JPG
• File:Rod Serling photo portrait 1959.JPG  :-) We hope (talk) 01:36, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Princess Irene of the Netherlands

On 27 March 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Princess Irene of the Netherlands, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the conversion to Catholicism of Princess Irene of the Netherlands (pictured with two of her sisters) and her marriage to Prince Carlos Hugo, Duke of Parma caused a constitutional crisis for her country? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Princess Irene of the Netherlands. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:29, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Margaret Tyzack CBE 2010.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Margaret Tyzack CBE 2010.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{non-free fair use in|article name that the file is used in}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:33, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

George, the issue with this image is that it belongs to Getty Images. WP:CSD#F7 says "non-free images or media from a commercial source (e.g., Associated Press, Getty), where the file itself is not the subject of sourced commentary, are considered an invalid claim of fair use and fail the strict requirements of WP:NFCC; and may be deleted immediately." The article says nothing about the picture, and your FUR says that the picture is used only for visual identification in the infobox. That's an automatic fail. You'd do better to try to get a picture of her in one of her famous roles and use that. Or move the image out of the infobox and write something about it if you can find some sourced commentary. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I did restore the screenshot image that someone else uploaded, but I didn't like the screenshot. However, it might comply with the article, doesn't it? --George Ho (talk) 23:04, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Can you make the photo work by writing something with these refs?

• Hytner, Stewart, Lloyd and Tyzack to be Honored by Queen Playbill.com 31 December 2009

• Patrick Stewart leads arts honours with a knighthood BBC News 31 December 2009

• Queen's List We hope (talk) 23:16, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, that won't make any difference, I'm afraid. The article already mentions that Margaret Tyzack was honoured the CBE title in 2010. This image is used for primary visual means and to identify her as CBE. --George Ho (talk) 23:21, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Listings at WP:CP

When listing articles at WP:CP please remember to also notify the editor who contributed the material in question. We often can't deal with listings unless this has been done. Thanks. Dpmuk (talk) 21:02, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

What are conditions that are not necessary to contact editor? --George Ho (talk) 23:12, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, the instructions suggest it should be every time but there are some cases where I'd still process the listing - other people working at WP:CP may have different ideas. Generally if it's an IP addition from some time ago and they don't appear to have edited since then I don't see the point as the IP has probably been assigned to someone else. If there is dialogue going on with the editor in question, e.g. on the talk page, then a formal notification may also not be needed as it's pretty obvious they've seen the tag. The idea of letting them know is to either get permissions sorted or to hopefully get a rewrite that's within policy. So if it's obvious they know about the listing I'll process anyway. If it's difficult to ascertain who the contributor is I'd first wonder if it might be a backwards copy, i.e. they've copied from us as copyvios are normally introduced in single obvious edits. If you're still suspicious but can't find the relevant editor (and it does happen) then leaving a note to that effect when listing will hopefully mean someone will spot it earlier and try to work it out themselves. If a listing at WP:CP is bad enough to be a G12 candidate then I'll delete under that criteria regardless of whether the editor was notified, although obviously in that case I'd have preferred the tagger to have tagged G12 rather than copyvio. Dpmuk (talk) 17:34, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 5

Hi. When you recently edited Sam Malone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Barfly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Cheers

I saw your WT:TV note. Are you aware of Misplaced Pages:TV-EPISODE#Important_articles_to_be_created. Apparently "Showdown", especially part 2 is a critically acclaimed episode that we need an article for.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:24, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Also some acclaimed Frasier episodes (notably "The Matchmaker" and "The Ski Lodge") as well as several award winning Cheers seasons (especially season 9) need to be written.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:49, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I haven't watched all episodes of Frasier, so I might reconsider. I did watch the Season 1 finale of Cheers, but I figure that other episodes might be notable in the real world but not by unpublished or electronically self-published blogs or sources that may come and go. --George Ho (talk) 00:26, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Your response puzzles me. Are you saying that the award-winning episodes that I am pointing you to are unsourceable?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:31, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

I didn't mean that. Well, if that episode wins awards, what if honored accolates are inserted in the Season page? If that is too long, and if the episode page is possible, then we might need critical responses about the episode. Do you have sources that, other than honor with accolates, review or analyze one episode with a POV or academic peer-review? For instance, "The Boys in the Bar" has a lot of coverage in non-primary sources, so I may create that later, but not at this time. --George Ho (talk) 00:36, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Accolades can surely be included in the season articles, but Cheers needs season articles. So far I have only tackled two articles from the list ("Pilot (The Cosby Show)" and "Hill Street Station"). Those are examples of the type of articles I am hoping a Cheers expert could create for "Showdown". I anticipate beginning work on a third article from the list ("A House Divided (Dallas)") in the very near future.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:55, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

I do care about Misplaced Pages, but I cannot find a way to explain readers that I have to do chores, so my time on Misplaced Pages may be affected. --George Ho (talk) 00:58, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

All I am saying is that if you intend to organize an effort to do a lot of work on Cheers and Frasier, there are a few things that might be high priority. Given that you have been spending a lot of time on Cheers-related article, it would make sense for me to point these out as articles that would be worth spending a some time on. We need award-winning articles created. If you are going to be spending time on Cheers related articles, please consider these articles that have won a lot of awards. Creating them will give us links for all kinds of other articles and templates (writers, directors, XXth award ceremony, Category specific award article, etc.).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:29, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

What does "Empty this section if must" mean?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:55, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Blanking the section, including the template. --George Ho (talk) 00:58, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry.

I would like to apologize to you. I should not have said or implied you were a Troll. You seem really smart and you seem to know your stuff when it comes to pictures and photos and copyright issues. I am going to start work soon on the Betty Briderick article. It reads kind of biased to me and I would like it to read more neutral. The Betty Broderick article does not have a picture or photo of her. I think it should have a photo of her in the article. Would you like to look for one and add it to the article? You seem good at that kind of thing and I know nothing about adding or uploading photos to Wikipidedia. Would you like to add a photo to the article? Thank you and I am truly sorry about my negative comments about you. Have a good day!--BeckiGreen (talk) 19:37, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

First of all, that would be Betty Broderick, correct? Second, sometimes, BLPs are not my thing often, so, if you are interested, either you or I must report issues of that article to the BLP noticeboard. By the way, I accept your apology, although I hope we must put that behind us. --George Ho (talk) 23:11, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Templates

Don't put templates in episodes that did not win, even if it was a nominee. I just removed a template from "The Boys in the Bar".--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:44, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Nancy

You remember how you nominated Nancy Wesley for GA - I was thinking that maybe we should hold back on that for a while and withdraw. I was thinking about it earlier and feel there is more that could be done - and I never like to promote something that is unfinished. I was happy you liked it though. What do you think about that?Rain the 1 11:02, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

The article is well-written and well-organized. --George Ho (talk) 17:29, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad you think that though and thankyou for buying more time to work on it. :)Rain the 1 17:32, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

GAC

You should never have to edit WP:GAC directly. When you withdraw a nomination, you just have to edit the talk page of the article. The bot will do the rest.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:02, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Citation Barnstar

I was really impressed by how A Young Man's World made Did you know…? I was saddened and shocked to read The Guide wrote, "A Young Man's World stops short of advocating suicide at age 30, but seems to imply that it wouldn't be a bad idea." It seems too many Gays have the notion that Gay life ends at 30, and I would have never thought a review of a porn as a citation on Misplaced Pages would have made me realize how stupid Gay stereotypes are and how we have to live above them. It's funny, back in the mid-90's, all male porn on the internet was of Twinks. There were no sites emphasizing male secondary sex characteristics, and it seems now that what was the "anti-gay" before the 70's has now become the new Gay and Bear is now the new Twink. Thank you for your contributions to give real-life aspect to something fictitious. I award you this Barnstar. Taric25 (talk) 01:40, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 12

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Matt Sterling (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to AVN

The Boys in the Bar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ken Levine

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Albatross

Why was Albatross (album) moved? No talk. No indication in the move. I reverted please discuss. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:16, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Albatross (Big Wreck album) and Albatross (The Classic Crime album) are the reasons. There. --George Ho (talk) 05:20, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Album talk page next time please. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Why was Albatross (composition) moved to Albatross (Fleetwood Mac song), given that a) there's only one "Albatross" song with an article, and b) this one isn't a song, hence it had the disambiguator "composition"? Bretonbanquet (talk) 09:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

OK, I've just seen the well-known "Big Wreck" song. But the Fleetwood Mac piece isn't a song. I'll move it. Bretonbanquet (talk) 09:50, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Second thoughts, I'll have a think about where it should be moved to. Bretonbanquet (talk) 09:52, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Administrators Noticeboard Thread

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 18:42, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

RFPP

By the way, what is up with the numerous requests for page protection, anyway? Templates should be added to RFPP with {{lt}}, for one thing. Also, you'll notice that a number of the requests were turned down. Generally, templates should not be protected until absolutely necessary. It's fairly obvious when a template falls into the "high-risk" category, although there's no set number of uses which push it into that category. Anyway... just because Twinkle makes it easy to nominate everything doesn't mean that you have to make those nominations. Overloading RFPP isn't helping, either (there's some consternation about your requests on the regular Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard).
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 20:54, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

So how will I tell whether which page deserves protection, such as template. Template:non-free reduced and Template:oldffdfull are (semi-)protected. You can ask for unprotection if you want. --George Ho (talk) 20:59, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Generally, they get protected when they need to be protected (following disruption, or when a template is really widely used). Just glancing over some of your requests shows that you should probably read through Misplaced Pages:High-risk templates. 500 transclusions is not even remotely "high risk" (at least, not when the tempalte is only used in normal articles. If it's used on the front page, or part of a dispute resolution process, that can change things significantly), and things like "Microsoft is a big name" have absolutely zero relevance to decisions about article protection.
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 21:12, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

What can I do next time? --George Ho (talk) 21:15, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Well... you could go slower (two or three at a time, at the most), and decide for yourself if the protection is actually needed. Protection is supposed to be a last resort, after all.
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 21:21, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

• George, if you see a template being vandalised, then report it at RFPP (and make sure you use the right formatting). If it's not being vandalised, don't. A lot of admins have those templates on their watchlists anyway, and high risk templates are protected anyway. So it's not something you need to worry about yourself.Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:10, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Now, have you sorted out the problem with the page moves yet. Where is the discussion on that going on? Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:10, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

No one brought up the double redirect thing yet. --George Ho (talk) 22:13, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Don't do any more redirects at the moment. Lets have a Redirects 101 over on the mentorship page. You haven't quite got the hang of the technical aspect. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:40, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg

PLEASE DISREGARD THIS MESSAGE, AS PROPOSAL TO DELETE THIS IMAGE UNDER THIS DELETION CRITERIA WAS DECLINED. THANK YOU! --George Ho (talk) 03:41, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

never mind; it is nominated for WP:FFD for violating WP:NFCC#2. If deleted, then I don't have to edit this message; if kept, same here. --George Ho (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{non-free fair use in|article name that the file is used in}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:18, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The One Where Rachel Smokes

Hello! Your submission of The One Where Rachel Smokes at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! LauraHale (talk) 00:56, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Reverted move

Hi, I had your move of Characters of Kingdom Hearts to List of Kingdom Hearts characters reverted because it went against consensus established at WP:SE. We consider certain pages about characters qualify as articles rather than lists because of their substantial contextual information (see Characters of Final Fantasy VIII, for example). Characters of Kingdom Hearts is a former featured article, not a list, for this very reason. In the future, I suggest you use the main WP:RM procedure for potentially controversial moves like this, instead of the technical moves section which certainly is not applicable in this case. Axem Titanium (talk) 01:06, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Where can I discuss this first? If Characters of Final Fantasy VIII is an article, not a list, then why is List of Tokyo Mew Mew characters a list? --George Ho (talk) 16:37, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

WT:SE is a good choice, if you don't think the talk page is good enough. List of Tokyo Mew Mew characters has all the qualities of a featured article, but the editors of that article decided to take it to WP:FLC, rather than WP:FAC, which is a personal choice. User:Deckiller and I felt that Characters of Final Fantasy VIII could stand up to the more stringent criteria of WP:FA? and we were right. User:Guyinblack25 and I felt the same about Characters of Kingdom Hearts and we were proved right there as well, though the article has since deteriorated and I'd like to fix it up some time soon. Personally, I feel that if a page can be made into a featured article, it should. Some pages can't be converted into articles (like List of Fullmetal Alchemist chapters) and that's fine, but if it can, I prefer to but this is just a personal preference. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:09, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

List of Tokyo Mew Mew characters

This page is an interesting case because it doesn't have a traditional list structure. However, it does serve to list the characters in its own way (prose instead of tables), and I think it can validly be called a list. I've seen pages similar to this one at featured list candidates before, and I never thought that they were at the wrong process, if that's your concern. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:29, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh, no. I have no problem about it as list; in fact, I'm impressed. However, Lemonade51 in Misplaced Pages:Peer review/List of Friends characters/archive1 believes that table should be used for lists. --George Ho (talk) 22:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Different editors are always going to have different expectations for what they want to see in articles, and lists are no exception. In cases where a page is a hybrid between a list and an article, this is especially true. If you're concerned about what FLC reviewers will think of the structure, you can always ask for opinions on FLC talk. I'm sure the editors there will be able to help you decide which format is best (it can vary by article). Giants2008 (Talk) 01:40, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Marple TV series

Hi, GH. Your db fx linked OK (by redirect) to the ITV series Agatha Christie's Marple, but I thought it preferable to name the link exactly, at least for the moment. I agree that inclusion of 'ITV' in the title would be very helpful, along the lines of a move discuission I've started at Talk:Miss Marple (TV series). I hope you will contribute there, in the hope of sorting out the confusion by consensus. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 16:07, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Oops, I see what you've just done and will consequently revert my own edit for the meantime. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 16:13, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

"Mentorship" request

You request that you would replace Fastily's place as a "mentor". Dr. K says a number of mentors is sufficient. I've not been getting responses from Begoon and some others yet. Well, let's wait... shall we? --George Ho (talk) 02:36, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I did not. As a matter of fact, I specifically said I did not wish to be called that. Beyond that, I'm happy to wait to see what others suggest. - jc37 03:10, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Merge to Musicians of the Titanic

George, I saw your request at Misplaced Pages:Proposed mergers. Since it was agreed that the Musicians article should exist, could you please create one (a mere tiny stub is fine for now) so that there is a place to discuss it? Then we can copy that userspace discussion over to its talk page. I don't care which article title you use for it, since that is easily changed. Let me know when you've done this, I'm watching your talk page. Thanks, D O N D E groovily Talk to me 12:19, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

grammar tip

Hi there - I've seen you around WP:RM quite a bit these days, and just wanted to give you a quick English grammar tip. "Punctuation" is a mass noun, which means that you don't make it plural with an "s". If you want to use it in a plural sense, you can either use plain "punctuation" (e.g., "Using punctuation in "US" may not be needed"), or "punctuation marks" (e.g., "Using punctuation marks in "US" may not be needed"). Hope that helps! Have a good day. Dohn joe (talk) 18:25, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello!

We hope (talk) 22:47, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I might be your Mentor..

Hello, George. I'm a experienced editor here. Since you looked for a mentor, I'm here. Any problem, just ping me in my talk page, and I'd respond frequently. I'm always ready to help. Dipankan 05:38, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

How much effort is involved? — GabeMc (talk) 05:39, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Dipakan and GabeMc, you are welcome to be temporary mentors, but you are not officially permanent yet. You can prove yourselves to be reliable; to prove yourselves reliable, let's review /Mentorship discussions and its Archives and User:George Ho/Block History #1, especially its last section, before we proceed, okay? Under mentorship agreements, I must request anything deletion-related in /Mentorship discussions, and each request must be reviewed there before approval, rejection, alternatives, or something. However, I don't know if I want to keep one or two as temporary, but I cannot go over more than two temporary mentors. Also, there are more agreements, but you can ask either of my mentors if you don't understand.

Nevertheless, jc37 said in User talk:elen of the Roads#Another mentor or enough mentors? that he would be a "helpful editor" for editor assistance, so I will take his word and declare him a "helpful editor", not a "mentor".

As for both of you, let's review before we go mootsey! --George Ho (talk) 06:41, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Well I'll review tomorrow if possible. Till then, I'm off to visit my grandpa! Dipankan 07:05, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Cheers

Wanna colloborate on creating article for some Cheers episodes? The first Rebecca and last Diane arent on here. Or perhps season by season articles.

Aslo was this QPQ] used before. i recall it was for A Young Man's World. But a new nom needs a ne review ;)(Lihaas (talk) 10:33, 21 April 2012 (UTC)).

I'll come back in the late morning or mid afternoon. By the way, help yourself in Template:Cheers, I Do, Adieu or The Boys in the Bar. --George Ho (talk) 11:14, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I creaed Becks' first episode. Will need osurces and some oversight. Then we can nom for DYK(Lihaas (talk) 06:34, 25 April 2012 (UTC)).

can you give it a go with some more expansionv?(Lihaas (talk) 16:24, 25 April 2012 (UTC)).

I would love to, but I'm researching more on the Season 1 of Cheers first. Old, but reliable microfilms of newspapers have TV ratings. --George Ho (talk) 16:25, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Where do you get that? Can we finish this to be eligible for DYK. As in next 1-2 days?

THen we can coordinate on new expansiosn for DYK too.(Lihaas (talk) 10:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)).

DYK

Just a note, ALT3 is incorrect. Marta was pregnant at the time, but not to triplets which I have corrected now. -- Lemonade51 (talk) 21:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Whoops, I didn't read it carefully. It's perfectly fine. -- Lemonade51 (talk) 21:26, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually it's ALT1 that is incorrect. She never gave childbirth in that episode, that happened in May 1998. The episode was shot after that. Consider correcting it. -- Lemonade51 (talk) 21:30, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Blackmark (cut from User:George Ho/Block History#Blackmark)

You unilaterally, without discussion, retitled an article in a way that contradicts Misplaced Pages policy against excessive and unneeded disambiguation. Article titles, by guideline, are to reflect the subject as simply as possible unless there are identically titled subjects. No other article is titled "Blackmark." It is best to discuss major proposed changes with a note on an article's talk page; see Talk:Kirby krackle for an example of collegial discussion designed to build consensus. I have asked an admin to revert the move, and I would ask you, with respect, to discuss this afterward on the article's talk page.

I would note that my request appears to coincide with the conditions related to your unblock request after past disruptive editing. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:11, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I think the spirit of the unblock is that you not make disruptive edits. Making a disruptive edit and then being willing to stop when another editor asks seems a way of evading the point when a disruptive edit is such that it cannot be readily undone, like your unilateral, undiscussed move. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:18, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

However, Elen of the Roads calls this cyberbullying. What do you think? --George Ho (talk) 22:43, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

If calling for discussion is bullying, then I just don't know what to say. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:19, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

There you go again. You're quoting policy that doesn't exist - like the note on your talkpage that says it's Misplaced Pages policy to sign edits on talkpages, so you'll delete any that aren't signed, but all you link to is a note that says it's good practice to sign your edits on talkpages. There is no requirement to discuss a move - unless it's something thats a political hot potato or equivalent. There was no reason to link it directly to his block history. There were no grounds to refer to George as disruptive. Elen of the Roads (talk) 02:54, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

One can establish whatever policy one wishes to on one's own talk page. There is no requirement at all for us to keep anyone's posts there.

No requirement to discuss a move? It's certainly proper practice to discuss a move, especially one as contentious as this, and especially if one has a history of disruptive behavior. Ask yourself: How can it possibly hurt to discuss a move and solicit input from other editors? To say that there's no requirement to do the right thing misses the point entirely.

You're George Ho's mentor, so you're not an objective observer as to whether his behavior is disruptive. Look how heated, defensive and emotional he became at the straightforward suggestion that he should discuss his edits. Any editor who jumps down another's throat for suggesting discussion is a hot-head, and that's disruptive. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:12, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I disagree. Being a mentor in no way implies not being neutral toward the behaviour of the mentee. There is no conflict of interest involved in volunteering to help an editor keep out of trouble. As regards Elen, she is actually the admin who blocked George for the longest time. She also imposed some very strict conditions on him. So there is nothing to suggest that she is not objective toward him. I also note that calling George a "hot-head" is too personal for comfort. Perhaps a lowering of the temperature of this discussion is needed. Δρ.Κ.  02:40, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Night of the Living Dead FAR

Hi! The FAR for Night of the Living Dead (review at WP:Featured article review/Night of the Living Dead/archive1) is still open, and could use comments as to whether the article should be kept or delisted. If you have a few minutes to revisit your comments there, and perhaps enter a declaration on whether you believe the article meets the Featured Article criteria, it would be much appreciated. Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 23:56, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg

THIS MESSAGE IS STRIKED OUT BECAUSE THE IMAGE WAS STILL UNDERGOING DISCUSSION. DELETED OR NOT, REMOVING THIS MESSAGE IS NOT NECESSARY. --George Ho (talk) 05:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Soundvisions1 (talk) 02:52, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for The One Where Rachel Smokes

On 22 April 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The One Where Rachel Smokes, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that two scenes of the Friends episode "The One Where Rachel Smokes" appear only in the DVD version? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The One Where Rachel Smokes. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 08:04, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

"Loving You"

CBS Copyright © 1974 Loving You Thomas J Mitchell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.101.3.64 (talk) 14:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback (24 April 2012)

—David Levy 16:25, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Trolljegeren

Hmm? Could you please elaborate on how or what won't help? -Laniala (talk) 19:56, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah, yes, I see now, and I agree. I'll try to reformulate myself too :) -Laniala (talk) 20:04, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

List of Mr. Belvedere episodes discussion

When I initially put together this list four years ago, I was inspired by Gerry A.'s episode guide:

http://www.oocities.org/mrbeaverfalls/guide.html

Notice how he has all the episodes listed in production order? I wanted to do the same thing. Hell, most, if not all Mr. Belvedere airings in syndication, were in production order. Plus, I prefer using that kind of formatting for the episode guide, than the typical table format. I think it makes the list of each episode much more linear, and easier to understand.

Ergo, the only way I think you and I can resolve this dispute is this: To let me keep the formatting, and production order arrangement, and for you to delete any tidbits that you feel may be either too trivial, and/or not enough research.

What do you say to that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vnisanian2001 (talk • contribs) 05:56, 25 April 2012‎ (UTC)

Please discuss more in WP:DRN. Let's not talk here. --George Ho (talk) 05:58, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Merge without discussion at Musicians of the RMS Titanic

You seem to have decided to merge a group of long-standing articles (including one created in 2005) into this new article. There is no sign of any discussion at Talk:Wallace Hartley or Talk:Theodore_Ronald_Brailey, for example. The discussion at Talk:Musicians_of_the_RMS_Titanic shows no support for a merge - Prioryman suppored initially but then says "I think, to be honest, that the articles should probably be left unmerged". Please don't do this sort of thing - Misplaced Pages has procedures for discussing proposed mergers and you seem to have made up your own mind and gone ahead. Being WP:BOLD is one thing, but should not apply to such a major rearrangement of long-standing content. PamD 07:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I did not boldly merge it; it was DONDE. --George Ho (talk) 07:58, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

...Well, I created the whole page per WP:proposed mergers. --George Ho (talk) 08:00, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Never mind. I don't know the difference between merge, copy-and-paste, and redirect; I did that, regardless of my interpretations, and the merge becomes unsupported. If you want me to revert all my moves into the original forms, say so, okay? --George Ho (talk) 08:14, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

If you "don't know the difference between merge, copy-and-paste and redirect", then please stop trying to use any of them. To revert all those moves would be a lot of work, as DONDE pointed out, and, from what you've just said, would probably lead to total chaos if you tried to do it yourself. Just please remember in future not to do stuff you don't understand, and that where Misplaced Pages says there should be discussion, then there should be proper, properly-notified, discussion - rather than rushing to merge an article which editors since 2005 have agreed merits a freestanding existence. PamD 08:34, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

How can I understand? --George Ho (talk) 08:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

First off, don't do something if you are not sure you know how to do it. Ask first. Second, when considering merges or moves, read the talkpages - including the archives - to see if it has been discussed before. Thirdly - with merges, the main reason for merging is that there is not enough material to sustain all the articles. Usually you'll find the articles lacking content are new, and may even have been suggested for CSD or PROD, so merging them is saving the content from deletion. Long standing articles seldom need to be merged. You should treat them as off limits. Elen of the Roads (talk) 10:13, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I knew this whole miscommunication was a big mistake. I wonder if I was wrong merging all articles into one with or without excuses. I wonder if the article was a total mistake. --George Ho (talk) 10:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think it was probably all a horrible mistake. I wondered about trying to revert everything to the status of 19th April or so, but frankly I'm not interested enough in the Titanic to bother doing so. But please don't do this sort of highly disruptive thing again. Aren't you on some sort of restriction which is supposed to keep the encyclopedia safe? Is "If any editor requests or suggests that George not make a particular edit/particular type of edit, then George shall stop this editing until discussion with mentors can take place." still in place? It doesn't seem to have worked here. It looks as if you proposed a merger, but only to Prioryman, who initially supported but then opposed it, and you then barged ahead with it. PamD 20:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Must I leave Misplaced Pages for good, and would anybody feel better if I leave for good? If not, why is Musicians of the RMS Titanic the negative consequence more than the positive consequence? What is wrong about this article? Never mind the miscommunication I did and the biography I merged. If I'm a failure, weirdo, or chaos, then please say so and why. Why are my actions condemned instead of praised? How can I make something that can be praised, even when I would not like doing whatever it's praised and my displeasure about something that can praised would be disregarded? --George Ho (talk) 00:08, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I have created User:George Ho/Musicians of the RMS Titanic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). I hope this helps you feel better, as I can still edit and restructure it somehow. --George Ho (talk) 00:26, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Hui dab?

Hui (secret society) is dab'd from Hui people, but I messed up when I tried to put one there. Does it need it?

--Pawyilee (talk) 15:48, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Your sub-pages

Hi. I'm happy to delete your sub-pages, but they don't need so many tags: for anything in your own user space {{db-user}} (or, even shorter, {{db-u1}}) is sufficient. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:59, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

My apologies

George, I know I told you that I would try to look over your drafts this week. Unfortunately, I have several pressing issues with which to deal IRL right now. It may be a while longer before I have the chance to review them, but I promise I'll get to it! Thanks for your patience. Joefromrandb (talk) 03:07, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Woody Interruptus

Your edit summary, which stated "per talk with Lemonade51, List of Cheers episodes#ep207. Clearly, even with accolades, this episode's inherent notability and notability itself are not strong enough for a stand-alone article" implied that he agreed with the decision that it should be redirected, when in fact he stated that "I intended to expand the article at the time of creating it but unfortunately never had the time to do so." at User_talk:Lemonade51#Woody_Interruptus. Although he consented, I think he disagreed. He included sources, which it sounds like he intends to incorporate. Basically, I interpret his statement as saying that he believes that the episode has inherent notability. Given its significant awards, it should be a stand-alone article in my eyes. What was your point with the redirect. It is one of the most highly decorated episodes in television.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Let's talk in Talk:Woody Interruptus, okay? --George Ho (talk) 22:53, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm there.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:27, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

TV to-do list

I have moved the season/episode drives and updated Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Television/to do.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

 Sweeeeeet!!! --George Ho (talk) 14:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

You are now a 'helpful editor'

I have declared in my talk page that you are an editorial assistant, not a mentor. To begin, please help me on the Musicians of the RMS Titanic. However, I don't know what you mean: editor assistance. Is it assisting an article with me or something? --George Ho (talk) 06:44, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Editor_assistance#What_to_expect_from_assistance. - jc37 23:55, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Consensus reaching of Talk:All That Jazz#Move?

The discussion was resulted as not moved per WP:NOTVOTE and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. However, I wonder if the decision was the right move; I don't want to contact the closer, JHunterJ. --George Ho (talk) 17:28, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll look this over shortly. - jc37 23:55, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Also, let's look over Talk:Lovin' You#Requested move and Talk:Blackmark#Move?. --George Ho (talk) 12:50, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Woody Interruptus

Woody Interruptus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This topic's notability is question, yet we editors could not conclude how to resolve this, so merger is discussed. --George Ho (talk) 00:43, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Musicians of the RMS Titanic

Musicians of the RMS Titanic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I have been scolded for 'disrupting' the biographies about musicians by merging them into one article. Now I have copied-and-pasted the whole thing into User:George Ho/Musicians of the RMS Titanic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), so I may spend time at my sandbox version to improve. However, I've been told that the way I did this article is a chaos. --George Ho (talk) 01:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Anchoring names on the list of Price Is Right pricing games

Hi. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish by "anchoring" the names of pricing games? Thanks. JTRH (talk) 17:51, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Thanks for the response. JTRH (talk) 19:48, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Desperate Women

Desperate Women has been nominated for speedy deletion as an obviously unnecessary disambiguation page, as it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either:

• disambiguates two or fewer extant Misplaced Pages pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
• disambiguates no (zero) extant Misplaced Pages pages, regardless of its title.

See Criteria G6. Senator2029 (talk) 13:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

DYK for Inch by Inch (film)

On 3 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Inch by Inch (film), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that one reviewer called the subway scene of the gay pornographic film Inch by Inch a blend of "realism and 'classical cinema'"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Inch by Inch (film).You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Friends episodes

Discussed here. So will be reverting. -- Lemonade51 (talk) 20:33, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

You are invited.....

As a recent contributor to List of Friends episodes you are invited to a discussion at Talk:List of Friends episodes#Disputed changes, which is discussing recent changes that involve replacement of transclusion with custom tables. Thank you. --AussieLegend (talk) 01:53, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Page Misplaced Pages:Notability (fiction)

• Please see Misplaced Pages:Cut and paste move repair holding pen#Queried requests. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:45, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for The Boys in the Bar

On 5 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Boys in the Bar, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the coming out of real-life gay former baseball player Glenn Burke inspired the Cheers episode "The Boys in the Bar"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Boys in the Bar.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Panyd 08:04, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

RTitle

I really didn't want to confuse the issue for The Rambling Man any further so I thought I'd bring this here. At the FLC discussion, there were concerns over bolding the episode titles, so I was going to change "|Title=" in the episode lists to "|AltTitle=" until the template was fixed. This was mainly because The Rambling Man didn't seem to want to wait for the template changes and was using non-compliance with MOS:BOLD as a reason not to use the template. However, when I looked at the versions of the article using the custom tables that were acceptable to those at the FLC, none of the episode titles were inside quotes, so I decided to use "|RTitle=" instead, naturally assuming that's what was preferred. Matthewedwards then said the titles had to be in quotes, and I explained why I hadn't done so here. This is the diff that The Rambling Man provided on the episode list's talk page. --AussieLegend (talk) 05:23, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

You can explain in WP:DRN#Friends episodes; that is for the administrator to decide. I have done explaining all I can. I'm too exhausted and tired to discuss this. By the way, I appreciate this, but I wonder if same thing should go to List of The O.C. episodes. --George Ho (talk) 06:11, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: Doctor Zhivago

George, I have no problem reopening and relisting RMs when the nominator or anyone else asks me too. But, I do hesitate to weigh-in with any interim rationale other than the request for doing so. The assumption for relisting always is the thought that further discussion may change to current level of consensus or lack thereof, although it rarely does. I also refrain from reclosing any RM that I reopen. Another admin will have to evaluate this one. --Mike Cline (talk) 16:29, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

George, no offense, but I find RMs based on WP:PRIMARYTOPIC to be essentially disfunctional because Primary Topic in my view is a flawed guideline that causes noting but tension in the community and does little to improve the encyclopedia. First it is based on the idea that a single editor, selectively interpreting pages views, ghits, etc. can divine what millions (100s of millions) of readers are thinking. Second, absent any solid empirical methodology for definitively determining the mythical primary topic, any answer can be defended and every oppose or support is correct in some fashion. I don't weighin on Primary Topic based RMs. I only close them based on the local consensus in the discussion. --Mike Cline (talk) 22:19, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:RFPP

Please familiarise yourself with page protection best practices before making further requests at WP:RFPP. I've declined all three of your requests today. Protection is usually not used pre-emptively, and talkpages are only protected in exceptional circumstances (and these do not include a perceived lack of usefulness in commentary or random suspicions of sockpuppetry for which you have no proof); additionally, protection should never be used to "encourage" an IP editor to register—they have every right to edit without an account. Maxim_(talk) 19:23, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: File:Jack Lord Hawaii Five-O title 220px.png

In your message on my talk page, you asked: "What must this image be?" I don't understand the question. — Quicksilver 21:22, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I'd just leave it. If someone wants to use it for some other purpose, fine. If not, some 'bot may eventually discover that it's unused and will flag it for deletion later. — Quicksilver 21:35, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for The One Hundredth

On 13 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The One Hundredth, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Phoebe Buffay's childbirth scenes in the Friends episode "The One Hundredth" were created using actual childbirth footage, dolls, and real-life triplets coated with grape jelly? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The One Hundredth.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady (talk) 08:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Josh Byrne Brendan Lambert Step by Step.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Josh Byrne Brendan Lambert Step by Step.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages (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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:43, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi there George Ho, thanks very much for your helpful formatting! Quick query, could you please clarify at your comment here, if the proposal happens to not be withdrawn, if your stance should be read as "Keep" or just "withdraw" ? Thank you for your time, — Cirt (talk) 18:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

User:JHunterJ

I think it might by time for you to leave this user alone. If you have serious concerns, file an RfC/U and see if you can get someone else to certify it, but your interactions on his talk page are starting to look like borderline harassment. I know you have several mentors. Perhaps now would be a good time to ask them what they think about your interactions with JHunterJ. AniMate 17:05, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

What is a "borderline harassment"? I didn't know it was a "harassment". I was just.... well, should I have done the RFC/U earlier? --George Ho (talk) 17:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Borderline harassment is exact;y what it sounds like. It may or may not be harassment, but it's very close. Going there to preemptively get him to disqualify from moves, trying to force him into administrative feedback, and going to a favorite administrator to second guess any moves of his you disagree with is getting to be a bit much. It needs to stop. You should definitely go ask your mentors to give their opinion of your behavior and the prospect of you filing an RFC/U. AniMate 17:24, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Asked Magog and Elen. I don't know how I can raise concerns other than RFC/U, but must I tell you examples, or is it pointless? --George Ho (talk) 17:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad you asked them, and no examples are never a bad thing, though I've been watching the situation and know most of what is going on. AniMate 17:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

In Talk:The End of the Innocence (album), he calls Noetica's comments rhetoric; was he correct saying that? Also, look at WT:Disambiguation. Also, look at his comments in Talk:It's Great to Be Alive (film). What do you think? --George Ho (talk) 17:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Moreover, Talk:All That Jazz (film) proves that sometimes consensus changes within one day after JHunterJ made closure on first move. --George Ho (talk) 17:52, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I see absolutely nothing in any of those that shows he's a bad administrator or really anything other than you and JHunterJ have vastly differing opinions about how disambiguation/article titles should be handled and that you're smart enough to go to a sympathetic administrator when you want to get your way. AniMate 17:56, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Also, look at WT:RM (even though someone said that his closure on Trollhunter was the right thing) and his user talk page itself. Well, in Talk:Watkin Tudor Jones (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs), he did close the move request as "page moved", but someone just reverted the title move, and Hunter re-opened it shortly afterwards. Well,... maybe that is why I have been.... "harassing" him inadvertently. --George Ho (talk) 18:05, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

At least he is correct in Talk:Doctor Zhivago, but I hope no one complains about it. --George Ho (talk) 18:07, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

What you don't seem to understand is that judging consensus is rarely about "right" or "wrong". Opinions can rarely be "right" or "wrong". If it was just about "right" or "wrong" everyone would have the exact same opinion. Administrators look at discussions like the ones you have pointed out, and try to see if consensus has been formed from the opinions given. For any requested move, you can bring four administrators in to look at it and there is a very good chance that they will all come to different conclusions or similar conclusions for different reasons. You have managed to find an administrator who sees things your way and have seem to have taken that as proof that JHunterJ is a "bad" administrator. He's not. His experiences here have just lead him to judge consensus in a way that you disagree with. AniMate 18:36, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

"Disagree"? Since when? I looked the consensus carefully, especially in Talk:All That Jazz (film) and I don't see evidence that any policy or guideline prevails strongly. --George Ho (talk) 18:38, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

You see it one way, I see it one way, he sees it one way, and another administrator might see it one way. I get that you think you are right and he is wrong. Like I said, everyone judges consensus differently. AniMate 18:51, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Was Hunter right or wrong about making comments about Noetica's comments without some explicit proof, such as calling them "hypocritical", "Orwellian", and stuff in WT:Disambiguation? --George Ho (talk) 18:53, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

George, I'm going to let this go since you're mentors are aware of the situation. I'm simply going to ask that you try and remember that opinions rarely can be right or wrong. They're just different. AniMate 19:10, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, in my opinion, this "discussion" is heading in the "not-so-fruitful" direction.

If you think that an RfC should be started concerning JhunterJ's closures, then start one, and see what the rest of the community thinks. (See Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct for more info on starting one.)

If you have would like jhunterj to explain/clarify a closure, then ask him about that close specifically. Otherwise, I think User:AniMate has a point that maybe you should steer clear of jhunterj at this point.

I of course welcome others' thoughts on this. - jc37 19:04, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Of course, must I contact Anthony Appleyard about closures that JHunterJ made, just in case that JHunterJ is too reluctant to re-open it? --George Ho (talk) 19:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

No. The proper way to go if, after asking the closer for clarification, you still disagree with a close, would be to go to WP:DRV. That said, my understanding is that you should get input from your mentors before posting to DRV, I think. So at this point, I suggest you wait for insight from your mentors. - jc37 19:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

What? The DRV is for reviewing deletion discussion. There is WP:requested moves/Closure review. Consensus is needed to make it happen. --George Ho (talk) 19:22, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes for requested moves, and yes community discussion (hopefully resulting in consensus). But regardless, as I mentioned, I believe you are to get input from your mentors at this point. - jc37 19:28, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requested moves/Closure review

Must I take this first to either WP:village pump (proposal) or WP:village pump (idea lab)? The proposal is becoming obscure and unnoticed lately. --George Ho (talk) 04:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Do you mean how should this discussion be advertised? I think it's probably (mostly) past the idea lab stage. I suppose WP:VP/Proposals might be a decent place to note it. And maybe also at WP:AN. - jc37 04:31, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Simultaneously? --George Ho (talk) 04:34, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not saying to start a discussion at those locations. I'm suggesting that you post a note that the discussion is at Misplaced Pages talk:Requested moves/Closure review. - jc37 05:32, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, the discussion is already at WP:VPP. The talk page there is obscure. --George Ho (talk) 05:34, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

By the way, I have noted that proposal a while ago in "Village pump (proposals)", but there have been little effort to bring in the crowd. --George Ho (talk) 05:37, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Requesting protection

I must be careful on requesting protections. Now then: I have looked at the history page of "List of The Price Is Right pricing games, and there have been some IP additions reverted for unsourced statements. Is this a good example to request protection? --George Ho (talk) 05:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

When dealing with content issues (and in this case possible WP:3RR) RfPP may not the best "first stop" for you, I think. You might consider Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Though as a friendly reminder, please try to stay with facts when reporting. - jc37 05:50, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback (22 May 2012)

—David Levy 00:42, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Cynthia (Cindy) Todd AfD

I agree with you that WP:NOBLECAUSE is an essay, not a policy, but I included it to try to explain the origin of this article. On occasion I see articles like this where a person or organization is not notable but has done a lot of good things and is well-liked. Cynthia (Cindy) Todd appears to be a well-liked yearbook advisor, and some of her yearbooks won some local awards. However, that's a far cry from Misplaced Pages's definition of notability. NJ Wine (talk) 02:55, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Another talkback

Speedy deletion nomination of Bu liao qing (song)

THIS NOTICE MUST BE DISREGARDED. THE ARTICLE IS KEPT BECAUSE THE SUBJECT OF THIS ARTICLE IS ASSERTED TO BE NOTABLE. Thank you, George Ho (talk) 19:23, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Ankit Maity_Contribs 06:52, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:NoFoP-France

Template:NoFoP-France has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Stefan2 (talk) 12:08, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Reliable source or external link?

I found this source: http://www.webtender.com/db/drink/5520. I must add content about the drink in this article: Home Is the Sailor (Cheers). I'm not sure if that is a reliable source, but maybe adding it as an external link is beneficial. What do you think? --George Ho (talk) 02:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

What about this blog: http://blog.thescreamingviking.com/about-2/ --George Ho (talk) 03:18, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm looking over Misplaced Pages:External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided. The blog looks shaky due to point #11.

I'm not sure about the recipe repository site. Might be worth asking someone else. - jc37 12:34, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

From User talk:David Levy:

What do you think: http://www.webtender.com/db/drink/5520 --George Ho (talk) 12:39, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

That definitely isn't a reliable source, and it needn't be added as an external link either. The article already contains a sufficient (if not excessive) amount of content pertaining to the drink. —David Levy 16:47, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Your redirect requests

Your redirect requests at WP:AFC/R contained the hidden embedded character %E2%80%8B. An admin created Bùliǎo qíng and Bù liǎo qíng without that hidden character. If the addition of the invisible character was deliberate, please make the case at the admin noticeboard regarding why it's necessary - I don't expect anybody will type it. Huon (talk) 14:13, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Help

I'm new :waves: I need some help. I need a neutral 3rd part to resolve an editing issue here with Hullaballoo Wolfowitz here --> Jessicka My point: "Art Slant, Juxtapoz, Coagula Art Journal, & Hi- Fructose are all reputable 3rd party Art sources. Saying these articles are written by friends is purely speculation on your part. Jessicka's wiki page clearly states that she's an artist. Listing past art shows with 3rd party references is just like listing the albums she's released as a musician in her discography. Both are wiki relevant & significant"

Thanks! (Lifespan9 (talk))

{{trout}}

In recognition of your siding with a long-term disruptive user without, apparently, taking the few moments necessary to properly review the situation. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 18:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

LET'S WAIT UNTIL REPORT IN WP:BLPN IS RESOLVED. --George Ho (talk) 06:13, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Talk:The Boys in the Band#Requested move

I don't think the statistics prove anything, as the rationale said. Shall I take this to the WP:AN then? --George Ho (talk) 09:02, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

What specifically is your concern? - jc37 09:06, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm checking the last 90 days of the film, and it looks more popular than the play itself. Even one day, the film reached 500 views. However, I'm analyzing the regular day-to-day view, especially from May 2012 of the film and the play. I'm not sure if the statistics, especially from 90 days, prove the film to be primary. Yesterday, the film pulled 152 views, while the play pulled 117 views. Sometimes, the play has sharp inclines and declines. Also, one opposer said that the discussion is a waste of time, and another opposer used only the 90-day statistics. One supporter says the title is ambiguous, and another supporter says... well, I can't summarize what the supporter said. The close rationale disregarded some arguments as unhelpful and used statistics as a reason not to move. What do you think? --George Ho (talk) 09:47, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't suggest taking it to WP:AN.

The discussion looks like a no consensus to me as well.

One thing that may (hopefully) help is to note that a closer of a discussion is not adding their "vote" or "stamp of approval/disapproval". What they are supposed to be doing is reading through the discussion, and weighing the arguments in balance with existing common practice/policy/guidelines.

So in this case, you suggested that the move should succeed due to primacy of the play because it was the inspiration for the film. Someone else suggested that they felt that primacy should be due to that and page traffic. Since this is a subjective opinion on both sides, they are (roughly) weighed equally. There are style guidelines in regards to this, but they vary in applicability on a case-by-case basis. So what you hope in an RM is that the others in a discussion will agree with your perspective as to how such guides should be applicabile.

Anything dealing with style (how we do things) rather than substance (actual content) is almost always subjective.

I hope this helps clarify. - jc37 14:23, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't hoping my side would succeed. Look at the closing rationale. Numbers of the 90-days statistics are interpretted, but the closer decides them as "correct". There are other ways to interpret the statistics. If the arguments are strong, why disregard them? --George Ho (talk) 16:58, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Misplaced Pages. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Misplaced Pages!

Your note

Hi George Ho, it seems I forgot to place the actual protection on Friends, even though I placed the tag on the page. This was an oversight on my part, and Courcelles has protected the page instead. :) Best. Acalamari 08:06, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

RE: Home is the Sailor image

Ah! the file dint indicate it was copyvio, i jsut found it from her page and used it to WikiFairie the page. In that case its a right removal. THOUGH we should tyr and get some image there as in Becks for her introLihaas (talk) 19:23, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

"edit" the summary section should work. This shuld help too Template:Non-free_use_rationale#note-purpose. Wanna give it a shot?

btw - the episodes in season 5 about the proposal and the courtroom right should be notable enough to create? The bar burning and selling the car, getting it back? Woody marriage too (end of season triple episode it was)Lihaas (talk) 20:02, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

The first one is more pertinent to her role in cheers though...perhaps make a capture of her first appearance entering cheers when Sam greets her. That could also be used elsewhere to indicate the progression of their relationship and the leads of cheers in the next 6 seasonsLihaas (talk) 22:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Screaming viking should do too. I think her first moment should do it, but maybe we should ask.

Other image would be, i think, from For Real Men Only, multiple occasions in the beginning when shes bitching/worried of being fired. Her boss lecturing. From The Little Match Girl is ultimately suitable. From This Time its for Real when shes self-absorbed at the end (and has the caveat of showing her in blond, based on the text on the page).Lihaas (talk) 11:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for BEN (song)

On 30 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article BEN (song), which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the pro-gay rap song "BEN (Better Everything Now)" was inspired by the coming out of the artist's gay friend and the It Gets Better campaign? If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:05, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you George Ho! This wouldn't have happened without you!Insomesia (talk) 01:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Your DYK? created-date move

Re: the double DYK? submission that you moved to May 28th with this edit: It appears your move was in error since both articles were moved to mainspace on May 31st, Sarkinite with this edit and Arsenoclasite with this edit. I admit I am puzzled by your stated rationale of "Under DYK rules, even history logs of editing under userspace count." since the editing history of Sarkinite shows that it only existed as a draft prior to being moved into article-space on May 31 (the date that the nominator had first placed the nomination in). If I've misunderstood something about your rationale or the situation, please let me know here. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 15:09, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Non-free review

Okay Can you explain how that would be more efficient than FFD? What I've found in 95% of cases is that I nominate it and then it passes with no commentary, so that seems about as efficient as it could be. Please correct me on my talk page if I'm ignorant or ill-informed. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:53, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually WP:TWINKLE includes a checkbox for "possibly unfree files" so it's a viable option still. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:02, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Wait I'm not suggesting that any of these files have disputed a source or licensing information, so why would I use WP:PUF??? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:03, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

No I did not say that I used NFR... I think we're talking past one another here. I saw a bunch of screenshots which are indisputably non-free--no one is even claiming otherwise. The problem is that they do not meet the non-free inclusion criteria, so I'm nominating them for deletion. No one needs to investigate their copyright status, just ensure that if non-free media are used, they're used with an appropriate rationale. I don't want to come across as rude here, but I don't think you understand or else you wouldn't be suggesting NFR or PUF in the first place--those are not appropriate venues for these discussions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:13, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Notifications Twinkle does in fact post to the uploader's talk. The problem is not passing a single NFCC criterion--it's passing all of them. Virtually any image could pass one criterion... Since something about File:TheOffice(US)1-04.jpg is critically discussed, then your rationale is totally appropriate: move it to be beside the relevant text. But in the cases of these screenshots, this is a very low stakes game as they can be undeleted at an time or easily recreated from DVD rips anyway. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:32, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Removal I'm skeptical about removing it, as I could still see someone challenging this (do we really need a picture of a box to aid us in knowing that he was in a box?), so I'm inclined to let FFD run its course. That having been said, if no one else chimes in, the image will very likely stay anyway. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:36, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Titanic 2020: Cannibal City

On 2 June 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Titanic 2020: Cannibal City, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Titanic 2020: Cannibal City is a sequel to the apocalyptical fiction, Titanic 2020? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Titanic 2020: Cannibal City. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:05, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/4 2012 Pulitzer Prize Winners

Please see my comments at Template:Did you know nominations/4 2012 Pulitzer Prize Winners. Even when you want to split a multiple nomination it is suppose to be discussed on the original nomination page so that discussions are not going on at five different pages on one issue. I disagree with the split suggestion. Please merge your ideas back into the original nomination as a ALT hook suggestions.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:09, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

There is no chance it will be rejected in favor of split discussions by any DYK vet. I have about 600 DYKs now and I can tell you the proper procedure for splitting a multiple nomination is continued discussion on that discussion rather than 5 different discussions. If you don't revert before I get to it I will blank all the discussions you opened. If you want your alternate hooks considered put them on the nomination page I originally opened. If not do nothing.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:14, 3 June 2012 (UTC)