This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 01:01, 8 February 2015 (Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Cyphoidbomb/Archive 5) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 01:01, 8 February 2015 by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) (Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Cyphoidbomb/Archive 5) (bot)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archives |
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
|
A cookie for you
174.91.69.244 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
Sky Plc
bskyb does not exist anymore the company has changed name to sky plc no need to change my update
Destructive Destroyer
Hello, Cyphoidbomb. You have new messages at Daniel Case's talk page.You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Happy Holidays!
Favre1fan93 (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:HH2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Gregory Peck
Cyphoidbomb - thank you for your reply and guidance. I'm truly a beginner - indeed, not even sure if I'm replying in proper form here. May we correspond via e-mail so that I can provide you with a response regarding the conundrum at Misplaced Pages concerning "Catholic" and "Catholic Church"? Thank you. Dave Peters (talk) 22:42, 6 January 2015 (UTC)Dave Peters
- Hi @Dave Peters:, you are indeed replying properly. You can also reply on your own page by using the {{ping}} template, as I have done, which will send a notification to most users. With absolutely no disrespect intended to you, if we could discuss your concerns on either my talk page or yours, I would find that preferable to using email, since the email account connected to my Misplaced Pages account is one I seldom use. Again, no disrespect intended, and I've found that most subjects are fine to discuss openly, as long as we are not being slandering anyone, as such discussions are often of benefit to other editors who might have similar intersecting interests. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:36, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Cyphoidbomb - I saw your undo of my link to "Roman Catholicism" regarding Gregory Peck's mother under "Early life" and thanked you. Before I saw the undo, I repeated the upgrade at the outset of the sixth paragraph under the entry for Mr. Peck's "Personal life and death." Meanwhile, I owe you the following discussion regarding the Wiki distinction between "Catholicism" and "Catholic Church" - specifically, why the former is mistakenly used as a link in the wide majority of instances when Catholic identification is called for, whereas the latter should be employed.
Prima facie, the wide majority of Wiki readers, authors and editors understand "Catholic" and "Catholicism" as altogether synonymous with the Roman Catholic Church, and by extension, Roman Catholicism. Meanwhile, from the Greek katholikόs, we have lowercase 'c' catholic in the adjective case, meaning "universal in extent" and/or "pertaining to the whole Christian body or church" (reference for these definitions is any reputable dictionary). Unfortunately, there is a Wiki page entitled "Catholic" that grossly overstates the usage and acceptance of the term "Catholic" outside the Roman Catholic Church. While perhaps technically true in an abstract academic sense, it is likewise blindingly obfuscating to claim that "Catholicism... and its adjectival form Catholic are used as a broad term for describing specific traditions in the Christian churches in theology, doctrine, liturgy, ethics, and spirituality." When was the last time a Protestant cleric of any stripe incorporated the term "Catholic" to describe his or her denomination's theology, doctrine, liturgy, ethics or spirituality? Credulity is also strained when the "Catholic" page claims that "'Catholicism' and 'Catholic' in this sense refer to the practices of several Christian churches."
Indeed, the only instance of (lowercase 'c') "catholic" in regular use outside the Roman Catholic Church is in the recitation of the Nicene Creed. Recited as a permanent part of the Roman Catholic Mass, it is at times heard in Protestant worship services, although such instances are becoming increasingly scarce.
When one proclaims "I'm Catholic," he or she is not attempting to communicate "I'm associated with the universality of Christian faith"; rather, he or she is proclaiming that they are a Roman Catholic - a discrete, human adherent to the specific religion of Roman Catholicism.
Regrettably, top tier architects at Wiki devote an entire page to what should be lowercase 'c' catholicism (though I understand its capitalization in the title bar to comply with style strictures). The page is an overwrought, hyperbolic discussion of the universal, non-Roman sense of the word, with its crime being that it creates an ill-advised "wrong turn" destination for Wiki authors and editors who wish to elucidate the biographies and histories of persons and things associated with - or formerly associated with - the Catholic Church. Indeed, after studying the pertinent pages and Wiki traffic flow for quite some time, I wonder if the raison d'être for the "Catholicism" page isn't to do exactly that... direct readers, authors and editors away from the patently proper and obvious destination of "Catholic Church."
The imbroglio could be easily rectified by converting the "Catholicism" page into a subsection (or even footnote) of the "Catholic Church" page.
Dave Peters (talk) 09:07, 16 January 2015 (UTC)Dave Peters
Bob's Burgers again
https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Koala15#Bob.27s_Burgers Did you see this? --RThompson82 (talk) 07:47, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- @RThompson82: The post where you violate Misplaced Pages's core policy on civility? Yes, I did. My advice to you is twofold: 1) No more personal attacks. We are presumably able to play in the sandbox well together like good little children. 2) Post your concerns at Talk:Bob's Burgers or Talk:List of Bob's Burgers episodes, which are the appropriate venues for discussion, and which may attract more editors, and more voices than Koala's talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:08, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Its Koala, though, so they got what they gave. Anyway did you see the episode? It may still be viewable on Hulu's free site. The episode revolves around 'burgers of the day' and Bob's dad's objection to anything beyond a basic burger. --RThompson82 (talk) 04:49, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
- @RThompson82: I believe I might have seen the episode. Are you asking me as a friendly social exchange, or are you asking because you're hinting that since Burgers of the Day has become a plot point, that we should catalog all the Burger gags? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:12, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- Its Koala, though, so they got what they gave. Anyway did you see the episode? It may still be viewable on Hulu's free site. The episode revolves around 'burgers of the day' and Bob's dad's objection to anything beyond a basic burger. --RThompson82 (talk) 04:49, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
HoshiNoKaabii2000's vandalism
Just noticed all these nonconstructive messages on my talk and I wanted to say thanks to you for cleaning that mess up. HoshiNoKaabii2000 seems to be just a bit off the track. Ethically 07:42, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- Ethically Yours All in a day's work! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 09:13, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
User:80.111.86.95 vandalism
Hi
I noticed you'd given this user a warning (on top of other recent warnings from others), they have also created a series of unsourced edits suggesting there is a Who Framed Roger Rabbit sequel titled Who Framed Lilo Pelekai & Roger Rabbit in production. Looks like vandalism to me, and I see some of the edits have been reverted on some pages. I would welcome anything you can do to further block this user (I don't know the procedures)
NoMatterTryAgain (talk) 12:05, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Curiously, another anonymous user 98.95.20.228 seems to be engaged in the same creation of a series of unsourced edits about Who Framed Lilo Pelekai & Roger Rabbit. I'm not sure how to investigate/put blocks in place/investigaye sockpuppetry but if you are able to progress I suspect it will be in the cause of truth and against vandalism......
NoMatterTryAgain (talk) 12:57, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi @NoMatterTryAgain:, I couldn't find the Lilo Pelekai & Roger Rabbit edits from 80.111.86.95. Got any diffs? The disruption from IP 98.95.20.228 seem to have been done circa December 26, so it's somewhat late to do anything about that. Reverting it was the way to go. If there haven't been any recent disruptions, then maybe it's best to ignore. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:04, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- I reverted all the ones I could find. It was more the blocking thing, which I don't know how to do. I'll try to maintain some vigilance. NoMatterTryAgain (talk) 07:29, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
- @NoMatterTryAgain: If it flares up again, warn the new user/users a couple of times. If they persist, go to WP:AIV and file a report. Be sure to include diffs, so admins can see the problematic, recent edits as well as your recent warnings. and it might be a good idea to point out the previous disruptions to help establish the problem's scope. If you're trying to demonstrate a longer-term problem, you may have better luck at WP:ANI, since AIV tends to deal with in-the-moment vandalism. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:57, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll refer to your pointers next time NoMatterTryAgain (talk) 21:02, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
- @NoMatterTryAgain: If you still need some help, let me know and I'll be happy to take a look at stuff. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
User:Hum1969
Since the user was banned from the CPTDB boards and was blocked recently, this user claims he has separate accounts like User:Trinity98789 and User:Acerdellrules1961. 135.23.145.164 (talk) 16:08, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
You're right, that was hilarious
I don't think that's the first time I've been accused of something like that, but this was particularly funny. Protonk (talk) 01:59, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Swami Agnivesh
Hi, Swami Agnivesh is a notable Hindu reformist in India. Srikanlohs (talk) 08:48, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Lingaa
Hi Cyphoidbomb, I don't believe we have had the pleasure before. I see you have experience on this article page which seems to have heavy editing going on. Could I ask for your help in taking a look at the layout format for the article as it is in a mess in the bottom half (References)? There is also different box office numbers appearing on the info box and at the Box Office column. Many thanks! Audit Guy (talk) 12:10, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hey there @Auditguy:, good to make your acquaintance. I didn't see a huge problem with Lingaa, format-wise. There was a reference error when I showed up today, but that was easily fixed. How does it look from your end right now? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:29, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Cyphoidbomb, Thanks! But this article seems to have constant disruptions with errors on the box office numbers citations. Audit Guy (talk) 04:10, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
A.W. Hill article
Hello, Cyphoidbomb. Just want to make sure that you received the message I left on Anthony Aoppleyard's talk page. All the best. Ghostrider51. Ghostrider51 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:10, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
- Ghostrider51 Hi, I don't think you left a recent message on Anthony Appleyard's talk page. I saw the comments at the Articles for Deletion discussion, though. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:58, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Clearing Up!
Sorry if you're confused, Cyphoidbomb! I saw your recent message on Cuchullain's talk page and wanted to address it myself (sorry if that sounds weird, I felt like I wanted to reply to Squiddaddy's message there but realized that I wasn't exactly asked to). I took a 2-month "hiatus" from editing on Misplaced Pages because of the weird near-personal attack that the (now de-sysoped because of what he did) user DangerousPanda gave me through talk messages, but I've been on Wikia this whole time. I was messaged on that site (Wikia) about the return of the RM and I had to reply, as I was the original supporter and still feel that the page should be moved to its proper title, but I can now see how my return could strike you as strange. I won't be on Misplaced Pages much after this, unless I'm needed, but Wikia is just more favorable as you can contact the Wikia Staff personally and take care of things such as the DangerousPanda incident, unlike Misplaced Pages where you can barely get support from an admin. Momsandy (talk) 19:15, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
- I also want to say that there is more than just the logo for the move's occurrence - Nickelodeon itself asks that the mark is used and does so on its official site, Facebook page, and when submitting its title to other sites such as TV.com. Please understand this, as you originally supported the move. Momsandy (talk) 19:19, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Thanks for the explanation. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:41, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks so much for understanding! Also, I found this article and it explains that, since Misplaced Pages's other articles (Teen Titans Go!, Yo Gabba Gabba!, All Grown Up!, etc.) use the mark, all titles needing the exclamation need to be named so, or else Misplaced Pages would lack "title consistency" (be less orderly). You don't need to comment on the talk page if you don't want to, but it seems as if the move is actually necessary and not just in our best interest. Momsandy (talk) 19:43, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Jimmy Two-Shoes UK Premiere Date
Though silly, I've got the video of the premiere of this show, which states it was first broadcasted on Jetix on Saturday, April 18. Gonna give you the link to the clip later. -Bankster1 (talk) 19:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- Bankster1 I just replied on your talk page. Let's keep the discussion there, please. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:07, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
RE: Unsourced Content
Hello, I read your message. The info I added is 100% correct. But, i'm afraid I can't give a source as it was in The Beano Comic.
I am a longtime reader of The Beano and I want to make sure the list of strips stay up to date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeanoMaster (talk • contribs) 16:17, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank You Note
Hello Cyphoidbomb, Thank you for your edit correction on my input on the Lingaa article with reference to Critical response. Appreciate it! Audit Guy (talk) 03:46, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Auditguy No probs. There's lots to learn, so I'm glad you're receptive to input. :) Happy editing! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:11, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Salting
Generally happens after 3 deletes. Surprised the article is still around. Although there is a lot to be said for a honeypot in this case. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:17, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Geraldo Perez: Good to know, thanks! As long as an admin uses his/her tools to facilitate the whackhammer, so we don't have to write a bunch of repetitive reports, I'm cool. In my RfA (almost a year ago) one of the things I probably should have stressed is my interest in quickly dealing with these trolls instead of requiring good-guy editors to fill out so many stupid reports. Can't tell you how many of my AIV reports were declined for some silly "This belongs at ANI" reason when it was clearly another sock of some disruptive a-hole vandal. But I enthusiastically digress! I'm thinking of being community sodomized again circa late March... We'll see. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:30, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Luck of the draw on AIV reports, some admins just want to clear the backlog, others are more flexible. Admin work is a thankless, timesink, hassle which is why I mostly stopped using my admin account and actually stopped editing wiki for a year or so - I got burned out. I do use it occasionally for pretty major stuff that needs immediate handling but can't touch the same articles I've edited in my normal account per the rules for multiple accounts, although I do get tempted sometimes like in this case. Anyway good luck on your RfA, seriously we really do need more admins. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:54, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Geraldo Perez Thanks mang! I get the general sense of that. I'll try to remember to not canvass you when I'm running again. I'm pretty much only waiting till late March out of respect for one admin who felt 12 months was a better artbitrary benchmark than the other 4 or so admins who supported a re-run in 6 months or so. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:09, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Luck of the draw on AIV reports, some admins just want to clear the backlog, others are more flexible. Admin work is a thankless, timesink, hassle which is why I mostly stopped using my admin account and actually stopped editing wiki for a year or so - I got burned out. I do use it occasionally for pretty major stuff that needs immediate handling but can't touch the same articles I've edited in my normal account per the rules for multiple accounts, although I do get tempted sometimes like in this case. Anyway good luck on your RfA, seriously we really do need more admins. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:54, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for correcting an edit of mine, I learned a lot. Faizan 06:16, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- I was on the go at the bar. Faizan 06:26, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Unintentional edit
I would just like to clear up that the edit I made to the Cleanskin (film) page was unintentional. I copied and pasted the reference from the hobbit page (wasn't sure how to set it out) and simply forgot to edit it. It's nothing major, I was just afraid that you might report me or give me a warning. - PotatoNinja123 (talk) 11:41, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- PotatoNinja123 Nah, when I saw the $79k gross at the correct BOM page, I figured it was an honest mistake, which is why I self-reverted the whole shebang. Thanks for the note, though! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:33, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey Arnold!
The reason both the Chinese and Taiwanese templates were added is because the companies based in those countries were involved with the creation of the show. Seqqis (talk) 06:31, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi @Seqqis:, thanks for the note. Which companies involved in Hey Arnold! are from from China or Taiwan? Typically for the addition of categories (which I understand you are not adding) there has to be an obvious reason why a category was added. (WP:CAT) I don't see much difference with the addition of these templates--there should be some obvious reason why they are added. There is no mention of China or Taiwan in this article, and I hesitate to look at all the articles you've changed. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:38, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- In the Wang Film Productions and Hong Ying Animation articles, it mentiones that the companies worked on Hey Arnold! as well as many other foreign animations they do things like painting, inking, and outsorcing foreign animations. As for the categories, I didn't think about adding them. Not all the edits I've done had the Taiwanese and Chinses templates added to them. And I understand if the templates can't be in the articles, even though you removed the American animation template. Seqqis (talk) 06:49, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Seqqis:, both of the articles you refer to are grossly underreferenced, with maybe three references total between them. I highly recommend you reconsider the changes you've recently made, as such additions should only be made if sourced prose supports them. I've seen far too many vandals corrupt articles with nonsensical company and national involvements (see Fidelis ofoajoku) to base any template additions like these solely on superficial article content. There is also an argument to be made about the criteria that determines the addition of these templates, but that is a secondary discussion. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:07, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- In the Wang Film Productions and Hong Ying Animation articles, it mentiones that the companies worked on Hey Arnold! as well as many other foreign animations they do things like painting, inking, and outsorcing foreign animations. As for the categories, I didn't think about adding them. Not all the edits I've done had the Taiwanese and Chinses templates added to them. And I understand if the templates can't be in the articles, even though you removed the American animation template. Seqqis (talk) 06:49, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Vandalism notice to User:ItSmileyRiley Might be a bit harsh?
I know you've been editing longer then I have, but I felt I had to bring this to your attention. You left a vandalism notice on ItSmileyRiley's page for this diff: . You said there that you had given a recent warning to not remove references, but if you did I couldn't find it on the GMW revision page or on their talk page. Granted, what the user did wasn't a great idea, but going through their edit history, it appears this was good faith from not being on Misplaced Pages that long. (They opened an account November 2014, and they just started editing regularly last week.) It doesn't appear to be a single use account (they've been editing other Disney-related articles), so I feel like this is a case of WP: Don't bite the newcomers. Maybe before flagging for vandalism you could leave a less-harsh notice explaining why we need the refs in the episode tables first?
Sorry if this comes off in any sort of not-friendly way. I'm just trying to keep this from escalating. Luthien22 (talk) 15:59, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Never mind, I just saw it. I still think the vandalism flag is a bit harsh, but I can now see where you're coming from. Luthien22 (talk) 16:02, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi @Luthien22:, I don't mind constructive criticism! I can see your perspective that it might be harsh. I don't recall the specific timeline, but there were other concerns too, like this removal of reference and embedded note which was repeated by a different editor, which set off my sockpuppetry alarm. I opened a case on them, although it's not my best work, since DisneyChannelFan18 has only edited one article a few times. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hmm... I can see where you're coming from on the sock puppet, though I don't think there's that much evidence yet either way. I'll follow the discussion and see how it ends. Thanks for understanding! Luthien22 (talk) 15:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi @Luthien22:, I don't mind constructive criticism! I can see your perspective that it might be harsh. I don't recall the specific timeline, but there were other concerns too, like this removal of reference and embedded note which was repeated by a different editor, which set off my sockpuppetry alarm. I opened a case on them, although it's not my best work, since DisneyChannelFan18 has only edited one article a few times. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Beachbody
Hi Cyphoidbomb, thank you for the edits. I noticed your deletions of some of the products listed. These were meant to give a more accurate representation of Beachbody as a company today. Insanity and P90x are some of the very first programs and there have been a lot more releases since then. I am just curious as to why they are the only ones listed. I am also curious as to how some companies like Les Mills and Zumba lists their products on their Misplaced Pages pages. Thank you. Vevapf (talk) 19:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Cyphoidbomb, could you please clarify my questions above? It would be very helpful to understand the guidelines better especially as they refer to company Misplaced Pages pages such as Zumba and Les Mills and others that list their products on their pages. When is it acceptable to Misplaced Pages for a company to list its products and when is it not? Many thanks! Vevapf (talk) 20:05, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi @Vevapf: I apologize for not responding sooner. It is important that we present content as it is seen through the eyes of reliable secondary sources, rather than simply hitting on the talking points that a primary source (for example the company's website) would want. The FitnessMagazine reference seems a little sketchy to me because it is encouraging users to buy the product and thus may not qualify as a secondary source that is independent of the subject. The American Fitness reference looks unambiguously like a press release, which makes it problematic for the same reasons. As for why other articles get to contain problematic content, around these parts we call that an other stuff exists argument. If there are problems in other articles, those need to be fixed as well. I can tell you that all those ® symbols at Zumba are grating my nerves and I may remove them by the time you read this. (Update: I did.) Other things to consider: Misplaced Pages is not an indiscriminate list. We should have a general understanding of the subject without turning articles into endless lists. We really should be including notable products in the article, not simply listing everything the company has produced. That's why they have a corporate website. If that's somewhat clearer, lemme know. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:28, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi @Cyphoidbomb:, Thank you for clarifying! This makes a lot of sense. Vevapf (talk)
Re:
Removing the series overview table from the main page is a growing trend I'm seeing, and it should be. These boxes don't help the main page at all. Grapesoda22 (talk) 15:39, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) @Grapesoda22: Actually, we discussed the issue of series overview tables at length at MOS:TV and there was clear support for series overview tables being included in the main series article. That's why WP:TVOVERVIEW was created. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:57, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- @talk page stalker: Why should it be included? Honestly it doesn't help the main article that much. The whole purpose of these tables is to help the episode list. On the main page its an awkward table that just gives a history lesson on the premieres and the finales along with an episode count, which is excessive for that context on the main page. Grapesoda22 (talk) 16:37, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- With all due respect, @Grapesoda22:, since you did not participate in the discussions that led up to WP:TVOVERVIEW, I don't understand how you can say with any authority, "The whole purpose of these tables is to help the episodes list". Prior to the establishment of TVOVERVIEW, there was no purpose or even any discussion about them. Only recently did we establish a purpose: to summarize key aspects of the episodes, like the number of seasons, number of episodes, start/end dates, and ratings if available. The fact that editors who never/rarely participate in community discussions are removing overviews as a "growing trend" doesn't make it appropriate or helpful. You are always welcome and encouraged to participate in discussions at WikiProject Television to help shape new guidelines. It would be more helpful to voice your opinions on the front end, rather than asking project members to justify existing guidelines to your satisfaction after the fact, or to ignore guidelines because they don't fit your world view. You are a good editor and we need more voices at the WikiProject. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:30, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- Indeed, "to summarize key aspects of the episodes" is why the table is included in the main article. Grapesoda22, your argument that the table is "to help the episode list" and "these boxes don't help the main page at all" is almost exactly opposite to what editors were arguing. --AussieLegend (✉) 07:04, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- Alright I'm stupid, I said it can we let it go. Honestly you don't have to rake me across the coals like this. It's fine Grapesoda22 (talk) 16:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- Nobody has said you're stupid, and we certainly don't think that. You're a good editor that we're just having a disussion with. --AussieLegend (✉) 07:37, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- Alright I'm stupid, I said it can we let it go. Honestly you don't have to rake me across the coals like this. It's fine Grapesoda22 (talk) 16:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- Indeed, "to summarize key aspects of the episodes" is why the table is included in the main article. Grapesoda22, your argument that the table is "to help the episode list" and "these boxes don't help the main page at all" is almost exactly opposite to what editors were arguing. --AussieLegend (✉) 07:04, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- With all due respect, @Grapesoda22:, since you did not participate in the discussions that led up to WP:TVOVERVIEW, I don't understand how you can say with any authority, "The whole purpose of these tables is to help the episodes list". Prior to the establishment of TVOVERVIEW, there was no purpose or even any discussion about them. Only recently did we establish a purpose: to summarize key aspects of the episodes, like the number of seasons, number of episodes, start/end dates, and ratings if available. The fact that editors who never/rarely participate in community discussions are removing overviews as a "growing trend" doesn't make it appropriate or helpful. You are always welcome and encouraged to participate in discussions at WikiProject Television to help shape new guidelines. It would be more helpful to voice your opinions on the front end, rather than asking project members to justify existing guidelines to your satisfaction after the fact, or to ignore guidelines because they don't fit your world view. You are a good editor and we need more voices at the WikiProject. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:30, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- @talk page stalker: Why should it be included? Honestly it doesn't help the main article that much. The whole purpose of these tables is to help the episode list. On the main page its an awkward table that just gives a history lesson on the premieres and the finales along with an episode count, which is excessive for that context on the main page. Grapesoda22 (talk) 16:37, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
69.203.27.146
I have blocked the IP for a week. Daniel Case (talk) 00:21, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm going to let that one go for the moment—they backed off after getting a last warning 40 minutes ago. (Of course, I doubt that alone means they've turned over a new leaf). Daniel Case (talk) 04:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Daniel Case: You're the boss. But I would be remiss if I didn't point these things out. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk)
Child labour
Sorry about that. I don't see many links that are supposed to go through labor (childbirth) that come from labour. I was thinking about the right link, but obviously clicked on the wrong one. Thanks for fixing that! -Niceguyedc 02:58, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Niceguyedc: Always happy to lend a helping hand. You do good work. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:02, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
semi protected edit request
Hi Cyphoidbomb. You can add:
importScript('User:Jackmcbarn/editProtectedHelper.js'); // Linkback: ]
here to use a script that is helpful for these. E C K S A E S 21:33, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
- Oh very cool! Thanks a bunch, @Becky Sayles:! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:01, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey! JTS names
Well, I was researching a little about the show's name. It turns out that the series was renamed in all European countries (with the clear exception of UK, Netherlands, Italy and France) to Jimmy Cool, as various of the Jetix channels which broadcasted the series were pan-feeds, which means those channels covered various countries with a same videofeed but different audiotracks according to the countries' languages, with an aditional English audiotrack, being the main of those channels, leaving the rest audios to be just localized translations of the track (example: Jetix Scandinavia broadcasted in 4 languages for each country, including English, being this audiotrack the one which leads the channel. The rest of the other audiotracks are just translations of that track) thus leaving the renaming of the show as obvious, as the phrase "Two-Shoes" of the show wouldn't be understood by a great majority of non-English speakers. The Jetix channels which were video-shared feeds are:
- Jetix CEE (Hungary & Czechoslovakia) with 3 audiotracks: Hungarian, Czech and English (main)
- Jetix EE (Romania, Bulgaria & Russia) with 3 audiotracks (later 4, and again 3): Romanian, Russian (until 2009), Bulgarian (from 2007 without continuity's translations) and English (main)
- Jetix EMEA (Adriatic, Turkey and Middle East) with 2 audiotracks: Turkish and English (latest one is main)
- Jetix Scandi (already explained above)
Well, the thing is, if you search every TVRIP of those channels broadcasting the show (you'll find them easily), the majority of them will have the opening as "Jimmy Cool" as decided by Jetix Europe Ltd, an enterprise which in the show's credits, are given the status of "Partner Producer" (Produced in association with Jetix Europe) and the main business who brought the show to Europe in 2009, leaving it with the rights to distribute the show, participate in the development of the animated series and ensure the leading-partner network, in this case Teletoon, to send the show to dubbing studios for broadcast in different languages, and the acreditation for such acts to be named the original network the show was intended for (the other one would be Disney XD, but it replaced Jetix in the US after the deal was made with Teletoon ). In conclusion, the Jetix brand has its right to be called the intended network the Jimmy Two-Shoes series would be focused in. Disney XD is just a continuation of the Jetix brand and, thus, not making it a Disney XD co-production until Season 2, as the production of the cartoon started in 2007 and ended in late-2008. ([http://www.licensemag.com/license-global/jetix-europe-steps-forward-%E2%80%98jimmy-two-shoes%E2%80%99 article which states the anticipation of the premiere of the series by late-2007)
And for the Quebecois French name of Jimmy Two-Shoes, Jimmy l'Intrépide, it's normal that it should be accredited because it was made by a Canadian production studios, which means it would intend to distribute the show in Canada on English and French as original languages intended for the major-speaking populations of the country. That's why Teletoon, on its English and French-language counterpart, broadcasts the cartoon with those names. The thing I do not understand is why the French Disney XD channel change the name of the show to Jimmy l'Éclate for all its broadcasting countries (La Francophonie) if the name fitted correctly.
As for this response, I beg you to put, at least, the European or the Quebecois variant of the name. In Europe, it's most known as Jimmy Cool due to the reasons I've written above, and because it had major audience than the other name variants, which should be put in the Broadcast section.
Well, it's up to you! -Bankster1 (talk) 04:37, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Bankster, thanks for the detailed note. I'm happy to yield on this since you clearly know more about it than I do. Whatever you think is best. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:21, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Cyberchase
I understand you trying to help clean up the cyberchase article, however some of the edits you have made do not have a source (like last names). Also, removing the iconic lines was not necessary as each character is uniquely represented by the signature line they used.
See Cyberchase's homepage for the signature lines: http://pbskids.org/cyberchase/cybersquad/ I suggest you review your knowledge of Cyberchase before you attempt any edits, or at least make a new section in the talk page.
Ians18 (talk) 07:33, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Ians18: - Hi there, thanks for your note. It's always helpful to included diffs when you are addressing specific problems. I make 80-100 edits per day and I don't spend much time at Cyberchase. I don't know which last names you are suggesting that I added. If I "added" them, it was likely because someone removed the content without explaining why, and I reverted them. Last names would presumably be mentioned in the primary source (the series) and wouldn't always need to be sourced. If you are familiar with the series and you are certain the last names aren't mentioned, then I have no objection that they be removed, and your edit summary seems to sufficiently address this.
- I removed the iconic lines and iconic actions in this edit with a fairly clear explanation, but I'm happy to expound: Simply because something can be sourced, and simply because something appears on the official website, doesn't guarantee its inclusion or imply that the content has actual encyclopedic or academic value. In this case, there is no context that explains the significance or utility of these "iconic" lines and they come off as unimportant catchphrase trivia, about as useful as "his favorite color is blue". In contrast, Captain Marvel's catchphrase "Shazam!" is noteworthy because it is what he has to say in order to transform into Captain Marvel. Mork's "Na-nu, na-nu" has received oodles of attention in magazines and newspapers over the decades, which would make it noteworthy. So, unless you can explain how this content in Cyberchase is noteworthy, I don't think the content belongs in the article. I'll open a discussion on the talk page. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:52, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- Addendum: The last names were added by IP 75.162.16.77. I don't see any reintroduction of the content by me, so I had nothing to do with that. Also I've made some changes at the List of episodes article that conflict with some of your recent edits, particularly with the use of 2013–TBD in the section header. The changes I made bring the article into conformity with WP:TVUPCOMING. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:07, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
The Dubs
Thanks for reverting the vandalism, which has been going on intermittently for a few years. The article talk page might shed some light on it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:29, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Ghmyrtle: Ah! Pure wit! I recognized the name "Patrick Bateman", which is what set off my alarm, and "Check Em" was additionally dubious if we were talking about a group from the 50s. Oh kids. When will they ever grow up? Happy editing, and thanks for the note. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Indian movies don't get importance from Metacritic and Rottentomatoes
Your view we do not summarize critical response. We use scores from aggregators like Metacritic and RottenTomatoes.
Indian movie reviews can be a aggregated through international business times review round up --Frost The World (talk) 05:17, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think I understand what this means. We are not aggregators. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:00, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Infobox vandal
Hi Cyphoidbomb, just a note that I've set the infobox vandal edit filter to disallow and it stopped every edit they tried to make with the latest IP this morning, so hopefully we won't have to waste time reverting this guy anymore! Sam Walton (talk) 11:13, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Samwalton9: Is this about the Ile De France guy? Good work! Which reminds me that I have to learn more about edit filters... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
- Turns out it isn't working properly, but as a fault of edit filters generally it seems; User_talk:MusikAnimal#Special:AbuseFilter/653 for more info if you're interested. Bottom line, keep your eyes open! Sam Walton (talk) 17:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Pointless message
I already reverted your pointless message. Thanks. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 13:15, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
- @JosephBarbaro: As is your right. But if you keep editing without first achieving a local consensus, or getting a new consensus at the MOS:TV talk page, you will very likely wind up blocked. These are not "pointless" messages. You are being given tools to help you address your problem. What you do with them is up to you, but you should know that this isn't the JosephBarbaro show, this is a community project. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:02, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
I know this isn't my show. I'm not trying in any way to act like that. I'm not a type of person who is full of his/herself and act a certain way that he/she thinks makes them look of something or whatever. Please don't make any smartass comments towards me, will you? No? How amusing. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 18:11, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Bernie Miller
There's a link to a Bernard Miller that's incorrect. That bernard miller did not cowrite "I Can't Stand the Rain", I did. Please remove the link to his page. My web page is http://newcovenantfellowshipchurch.org/about/pastor-bernie-miller/. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berniemiller (talk • contribs)
- @Berniemiller: Hi sir, I noticed the edit you were making at Supa Dupa Fly. I have fixed the link so that it points to Bernie Miller (pastor). You can see my edit here. We don't add links to external websites in the body of articles. We typically have External links sections at the bottom of pages, but we have to be very choosy about links to add. I don't think we need to add a link to your church page—it will just be confusing. Instead, the link I added will allow readers to learn more by sending them to the correct article about you. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:36, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Your incorrect CSD tagging of Tavares Jamal Cherry
"(...) he came to prominence playing the Evil Guardian (...)" (emphasis mine) is an indication of importance. The article shouldn't have been tagged with A7. Remember - a7 is not about notability, it's about significance; however poorly asserted, if it's there, it's there and a7 doesn't apply. Also, there's no indication it's an autobiography so I removed that tag too. Be more careful when tagging articles in the future. That said, the guy does seem to fail GNG so you may consider proposing the article for deletion at AfD. 190.93.193.7 (talk) 21:45, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Barnstar of Integrity
The Barnstar of Integrity | ||
I saw your comments on the talk page for the article Tavares Jamal Cherry, and was moved by your inclusion of the anon position for retaining the article, which you didn't have to include but did anyway. To me, that demonstrates that you are a person of integrity, and in recognition of that fact I hereby award you this Barnstar of Integrity. TomStar81 (Talk) 09:23, 4 February 2015 (UTC) |
- @TomStar81: Thank you sir! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:19, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Fairly OddParents
Thank you for continually fixing the incorrect air dates that keep appearing. I had panicked a little thinking I had missed the episode "Fairly Old Parent". 204.58.244.4 (talk) 21:44, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
The "vandalization"
Listen, this IP right here that vandalized Gadget and the Gadgetinis or whatever, this is a school IP. I'm not making an account, but hopefully I can clear up that whoever the vandal is, it's a kid (hence why (s)he was vandalizing kids' shows).
--38.140.22.150 (talk) 16:56, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:11, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Talk Liso20
I understand,
I will start working on a better cast. I am new to Misplaced Pages, and a fan on LPS so I was just trying out my thoughts. Thanks, Liso20s
- Welcome, @Liso20:! If there is a way to incorporate real-world information in the character list that would be ideal. We're not locked into just providing character descriptions. If there is a noteworthy story about how a certain actor was picked for a role, we can include that sort of thing as well. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:54, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks again! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liso20 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Hey, BTW do you know if their is any way for me to add an entirely new page. I want to do it about the 5 elements, (not the Chinese ones.) Their is no article about them yet.
Thanks @liso20 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liso20 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- @Liso20: Your best bet is to start with the Articles for Creation process. This is designed to help new users get articles up to speed before releasing them in the wild, as live articles get put under a lot of scrutiny and can be quickly deleted, which would be frustrating. You might also want to take a look at the short video at Referencing for Beginners, since the ability to provide sources is crucial. Lemme know if I can help you with anything else. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:07, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Apology
Hey, Cyphoidbomb. It's fine that you don't forgive me for what happen about nearly a week ago. Just wanted to say my bad for my actions over at the List of SpongeBob SquarePants episodes article, as well as all the excessively ruthless insults and degrading remarks that I also said on the contributions. I do regret all of that, and I promise myself that I'll be respectful, sensible, and calm, and take any disagreements over at the disccussion/talk pages without breaking any more rules again. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 20:15, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- @JoesphBarbaro: Your apology is well received and appreciated. I think we all sometimes forget there are human beings on the other side of the computers. Good luck, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:18, 7 February 2015 (UTC)