![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
So I've been on this site for a long, long time now and I've come to realize that I actually fucking hate it. I have two jobs and an ill parent who is dependent on me, so lots and lots going on. This isn't really new, but lately it just seems like this site is nothing but childish bickering between immature, anonymous editors who have no real interest in making "good" articles, but just in getting their own way. Every single day on this site is nothing but frustration and I have much better things to do. So I'm done. I'm so fucking done. You are basically the only editor left on this whole site that I agree with or have even the smallest amount of respect for. It's been nice working with you the past few years. Look after everything. You can e-mail me at schrutedit12@hotmail.com if you wanna keep in touch or something. If not, job well done, man. I don't know how you put up with it. Peace out. SchrutedIt08 ( talk) 13:59, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi can i ask your reasoning for the removal of supernatural fiction from the X-Files seasons? The monster of the week episodes of the X-Files are indeed mainly supernatural fiction as well as the second film.-- Taeyebaar ( talk) 04:11, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Please see this topic and The X-Files: I Want to Believe-- Taeyebaar ( talk) 04:13, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Drove, I just posted on the DRN requesting the joke of a DR on BSG be closed. Twobells hasn't posted to it since January 22 and on Wikipedia since January 30. This has become a farce, and it's time to close it down. I hope it's acceptable that I commented that you and I both were OK with the article as it stood before all this started. -- Drmargi ( talk) 14:43, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I just wanted to stop by and express my deepest gratitude for the outstanding work you do on here. I feel like there is so much idiocy and monotony out there that editors like you need some form of positive reinforcement. If you ever need any assistance, don't hesitate ask. :) Cheers, LLArrow ( talk) 06:33, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Bases on my experience on wikipedia I have mostly seen the list of seasons listed as transmission see Gogglebox as one example. Thank You. JohnGormleyJG ( talk) 18:31, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello, the contribution that I posted today was not "uncited original research". Each of the two referenced websites stated the percentage of their critics who gave a positive rating to The Walking Dead; I noted the result of a simple (first grade?) math problem using those percentages. The referenced paragraph currently quotes from three negative reviews even though 83% of the reviewers gave the show a positive rating, hence my attempt to counteract this counterintuitive wrong and inject logic into the paragraph.
Hey, I see you dropped in the ratings for last nights episode, but I can't find the info on the cited TV by the Numbers site...? LLArrow ( talk) 23:12, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
Thanks for all the help, first of all! I think adding the italics around Veronica Mars in the titles of the episodes was a good idea. Secondly, The screenshot that I used for "
M.A.D." was recently tagged for deletion. I think it's appropriate, but could you possibly chime in with your thoughts on Files for Deletion? (It's February 11 by the way). Thanks in advance and I don't mind even if you think it should be deleted! :)
BenLinus
1214
talk 03:38, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your thoughtful attention to (and through source-referencing, largely settling) the "main" v. "recurring" character issue at the Marvel Agent's… articles. You may wish to take a moment and look at the "Fitz plot element important v. unimportant" Talk entry at the season 2 episodes article, as I think your fellow editor there is more willing to go with gut than reason or sources, on this separate issue. Otherwise, I'm done with these, and have nothing more to offer on either matter. Cheers, have enjoyed the education that you offered. 71.239.87.100 ( talk) 15:32, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello Drovethrughosts, I am inquiring form you is there any possible way for myself to become an administrator. I am aware there is a request form but not sure where it is. I came here as I know you are an administrator so I was hoping for you're help. Also if you have any tips on how to get qualified please tell me.
Thank You so much for your help JohnGormleyJG ( talk) 15:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
For specific examples:
You need to establish yourself much more, making quality edits with references, reverting vandalism, and following and understanding guidelines, etc. Hope you don't feel I was too harsh, but I wanted to be blunt and to-the-point, especially if you're seriously considering applying for admin. You also need to ask "why" you're looking to want to be an admin, what is it that you'd want to accomplish as admin that you can't as a regular editor. Always feel free to contact me for anything. :) Drovethrughosts ( talk) 17:28, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
Thank you so much for helping me with my Veronica Mars episode articles and being so nice about it! Now that I'm done with season one, I thought it it would be appropriate to send a little appreciation for your work! :) BenLinus 1214 talk 16:31, 17 February 2015 (UTC) |
I reduced it to the 27 February. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 21:49, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Jimthing ( talk) 23:09, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I could use your assistance over at American Horror Story: Hotel, that is if you agree. I have a bunch against me, and could use some fortitude. Thank you so much, LLArrow ( talk) 17:58, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
I noticed you changed a lot of work I done on the 24: Live Another Day page removing about 80% of the information. As it stands there is no plot summary, character discription or info on Almeida's fate. So may I just ask why you removed all of this. JohnGormleyJG ( talk) 20:05, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I don't know if youv'e seen, but Zap2it currently has an episode listed as 14 and airing Tuesday, April 21, 2015, called "March 8, 1983"; given that the date is a day before the season finale/13th episode is scheduled to air... What's your take on it? LLArrow ( talk) 01:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Why is this getting cut out? This seems pretty obvious to me and is quite sharp writing that makes it's point so deftly that it should get a gold star. Why an 'A' and not any other letter in the alphabet?
"This 'A' may allude to the Scarlet Letter (from the book of the same name and a writers room would have known this) and was the mark of infidelity. This is accompanied by the longing pop song Spicks and Specks by BeeGees which contains lyrics the likes of:
"Where is the sun...That shone on my head...Where is the light...And where are the friends..I could meet. Where are the girls I left far behind. All of my life I call yesterday..Of my life 've gone away"
As Rick presses his forhead against the wall and a zombie is on the other side the viewer is left with the impression that what Rick desires and loves is life outside the compound" and living within the walls is a lie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhaddonpearson ( talk • contribs) 16:52, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Why did you change the genres? Seemed pretty suitable and consistent with reviews. EauZenCashHaveIt ( I'm All Ears) 08:04, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
http://m.hitfix.com/whats-alan-watching/better-call-saul-creators-on-the-purposely-sh-ty-opening-title-sequence/3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikiFring ( talk • contribs) 22:35, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Why'd you undo the Season 2 info I made to "Halt and Catch Fire (TV Series)"? That took me a long time and it was sourced from imdb.com, which is as official as it gets? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muldfeld ( talk • contribs) 06:27, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
I thought the writers themselves generate it. Thanks for explaining. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muldfeld ( talk • contribs) 06:10, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
What do you recommend as a source? It's all over Google, as a given. You don't need a source to say the sky is blue. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:42, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
You reverted an edit of mine that you state was in the past. It is obviously in the past as this is a prequel to Breaking Bad but it occurs after the current events of Better Call Saul (2002). I just rewatched that very scene on Netflix and he states his name as Saul. Currently in Better Call Saul he has not changed his name yet hence this is in the future. Also in your edit summary you said it's seems you're not paying attention enough. Which strikes to me as very rude and I wouldn't let anyone talk to me like that especially I fixed an edit summary which you complained about for episode 3. JohnGormleyJG ( ✉) 21:41, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
In response to your comments on the Wings episodes page, I do agree that they need to cited. This is a very tedious process though, and could take a while to accomplish. All of these numbers came from http://tvaholics.blogspot.com. If you're not familiar with this website; it was used to cite ratings for shows such as Seinfeld, Frasier, and Beverly Hills, 90210 (the one I've been working on). All of the sources for the Wings episodes can be found in the references on these pages. If you want, you are more than welcome to copy them over yourself, or if you'd like, I could do it. If I do it, it could take a couple weeks, as there are 172 episodes, and I don't have unlimited time. Thank you! Rswallis10 ( talk) 21:32, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Why was it reverted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SanguineTWD ( talk • contribs) 17:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Are you changing all of the episode articles based upon cited information that Game of Thrones does not have production codes? If so, it would be great if you could link that source her, so as to prevent a massive revert of your production code removals. Thanks. - Jack Sebastian ( talk) 15:54, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Why did you revert my edits. Several characters who appeared in only one or two episodes, depending on what season they're in, counts as guest star.02:34, 1 April 2015 (UTC) 72.64.207.76 ( talk)
I was trying to fix everything especially adding in missing guest stars for each season. 72.64.207.76 ( talk) 20:07, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi DTG, I appreciate your comments re: Better Call Saul. For the record, I opened a discussion at Talk:Better Call Saul about the overly-wordy synopses a few days ago and invited Peace to participate. As a minor point, the 200-500 word range is for standalone episode articles that contain plot summaries (Example: Confirmed Dead). For tabular "list of episodes" articles the range is 100-200 words and the example given is Smallville (season 1). Anyhow, thanks again, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:00, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
You seem like a reasonable person (unlike many on Wikipedia), so I'm going to explain my reasoning behind the Live+SD Ratings table on the Empire episodes page. If you look at shows like Modern Family (season 6) and Scandal (season 4), they both have a Live+7 table as well as a Live+SD table, because they each serve different purposes. The Live+SD table holds the 18-49 demographic ratings, as well as the weekly 18-49 rank, and viewership rank, which cannot be found on the Live+7 table. The Live+SD table needs to be on the same page as the episode table, because the citations for the 18-49 demo rating are the same citations as the viewership numbers from the episode table. I do not like the fact that the 2 tables are on two different pages, but whenever a season 1 page is made, they can be moved together on the same page. Feel free to comment your thoughts on the matter. Thanks for your time. Rswallis10 ( talk) 23:01, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Heya, FYI: An ANI discussion re: editor Peace is contagious. Regards, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 02:54, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
This or this? — Wylie pedia 02:03, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I like your line 'promotes his new biz @ nursing home', I coudlnt' quite think of how to word that, good call ! Peace is contagious ( talk) 23:27, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to know why you deleted the edit with the "Gag Reel" special episode adding. It has its place in the eps list, I think. Thanks for the answer ! 78.247.98.33 ( talk) 19:08, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm very sorry - I wasn't trying to vandalize your page. I just wanted to add the information about Season 6 of "Through The Wormhole With Morgan Freeman" I had found online. I truly love this show. Karellen32 ( talk) 06:03, 23 April 2015 (UTC)Sandra Buskey, Karellen32
You are quite welcome. I'm glad you are watching the show. Descriptions for each episode can be found here: [1] I would insert them myself, but I cannot figure out how to edit tables. Karellen32 ( talk) 16:35, 23 April 2015 (UTC)Sandra Buskey, Karellen32
Did you make a mistake here? I think that the series just began its second season this last week. - Jack Sebastian ( talk) 16:25, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Would you be so kind as to explain why you removed the spoiler warning I added at the Strike Team header? I know the show is old, but not everybody has seen it all. While having a read through I read a couple of major plot developments that I wish I could unread, so my addition was made with a view to helping others to avoid that. I don't really see how a spoiler warning adversely affects the (well written) page.
Regards, Lore ( talk) 11:30, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Cleopatra Coleman is not a main character, but a recurring character, as she has been in only 5 episodes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Everythingever20 ( talk • contribs) 03:24, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
"main" cast status is determined by the series producers, not by popularity or screen time.This means that it doesn't matter whether she has appeared in one or one thousand episodes, if she is credited on-screen (the normal litmus test that we use) she is a starring character. As I've indicated on my talk page, Coleman has been credited on-screen by producers as a starring character. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 05:38, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey! You've been editing Wikipedia for quite a longer time than me, and I have a question for you. I believe you are familiar with how Wikipedia handles TV pages. I don't know how familiar you are with The Blacklist, but I am having a major problem with the most recent episode (the season finale). My TV listed the title of the episode as "Masha Rostova," yet during the intertile of the episode, it listed the title as "Tom Connolly." Zap2it lists it as "Tom Connolly," and The Futon Critic lists it as both (the original airing is titled "Tom Connolly" [1] and the rerun of it is listed as "Masha Rostova." [2] Throughout the day, the Wikipedia page has been changed at least 6 times between the two names. I was just wondering if you had any advice about how to handle this situation. This is quite similar to The Goldbergs season 1 finale situation, in which the title agreed upon was the one with the most references. Again, sorry to bother you, please let me know if you have any ideas, or can send me to someone who does. Thanks! Rswallis10 ( talk) 20:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Could you please provide the reasoning to revert my latest change? My version was supported by the detailed GoT wiki chapter-episode comparison. The version you restored was supported by a inactive link to the article which (even at the time it existed) provided an approximation written down at the very early stage of designing the season in question. How is this dead link a more believable source? Thanks. 83.27.130.225 ( talk) 21:27, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello Drovethrughosts,
I am just leaving this message regarding your recent change to
Curb Your Enthusiasm, according to
MOS:TV related is to be used only for remakes, spin-offs, and adaptations.
Seinfeld doesn't fit any of those categories. I completely understand that there are plenty of references and that reunion (sort-of) episode, but the actual show Curb Your Enthusiasm is not officially related to Seinfeld.
Thank You,
JohnGormleyJG (
✉)
09:42, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I was thinking that I could nominate some VM articles at GAN—namely, " A Trip to the Dentist", " Normal Is the Watchword", " My Mother, the Fiend", " Donut Run", and " The Rapes of Graff", as well as possibly " Weapons of Class Destruction" and " Rat Saw God". What do you think about that? Are they fine as is, or would you suggest removing the "cultural references" and "music" sections? Also, I just recently found out that the TV.com ref that I've been using has a section called "The plot thickens", which I could boil down, meaning that I could keep arc significance. I just wanted to get a second opinion. :) Thanks so much, BenLinus 1214 talk 13:06, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey there. The reason I uploaded a new version of the Game of Thrones season 5 cover was because the picture would be closer to a DVD Cover. The file I uploaded (without the 4.12 and HBO at the bottom) was not created by me, but is actually an image for the upcoming phsyical release of the season on Amazon.com. Although I could live with it, if we simply wait for an official DVD cover to be released. Greetings.-- 109.42.2.169 ( talk) 22:33, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me is not series, but it is part of Twin Peaks franchise.
For example:
movies are in episodes list.
This movie is part of Twin Peaks's plot, and will be in this table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lado85 ( talk • contribs) 12:31, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey, are you sure about that Happyish pilot thing? Normally "Interstitial break" refers to the 3 to 5 minutes after the previous episode run a few minutes short. Happyish started airing at 10pm, and not at 9.57 80.219.112.49 ( talk) 20:07, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
My goal here is to bring it up to speed with what I've seen in other featured articles, such as this one. I plan on rolling the format out to the other season articles. I'm open to suggestions of course, but I think per WP:BEGIN, we should strive for the bolded subject in the opening sentence to match closely the title of the article. It doesn't have to be verbatim of course, but this appears to be an acceptable way as evidenced in the example at that link above. What do you think? -- GoneIn60 ( talk) 15:57, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
The fifth season of The Walking Dead, a horror–drama television series on AMC, premiered on October 12, 2014, and concluded on March 29, 2015, consisting of 16 episodes.
Please take a look at Galactica's talk page before reverting again. Thanks!- 79.223.12.42 ( talk) 21:18, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
"there is no consensus to change this" - I'm baffled. Have you read the talk section? There is literally nobody who defends "reimagining". Please explain in the talk section.- 79.223.12.42 ( talk) 23:10, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed you undid an edit of mine on 24 (TV series). It contained distinguishing the revived series from the original. You said that there was “no reason for separation”. I am just curious why? All other TV shows I have come across that was revived separate the revived from the original, in a place like the overview. E.G. Whose Line Is It Anyway? (U.S. TV series). I personally think it is better this way as it more or less bullet points the key parts. So what is your opinion on this? Should I ask it on the 24 Talk Page instead? Thank You -- JohnGormleyJG ( ✉) 14:50, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I'll take your word for it that the first season link is working wherever you are - it wasn't working for me yesterday and it still isn't working for me today. The season two link has been working fine both days, but i've just found where the release date is on that one. Apologies. Just a heads up i'm actually going to be deleting that table before I finish working on the article and nominate it for GA, as I think it's rather pointless, I mean, it can be simplified to just say they were all released in 2003. Nobody is going to care about the minor differences in date between UK and US releases anyway. Freikorp ( talk) 13:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I just wanted to personally apologize for the hidden text I wrote on the Total Divas page acting as if that article was my own creation. I read the ownership article stating no one is a owner of anything, and realize my comment was unnecessary. Thank you for changing it and bringing me up to scratch with how an appropriate editor should behave. The reasons, however, for my previous actions were simply because a particular editor keeps changing and making unreliable edits to the page. After exchanging a few words with them, they still haven't made adjustments, hence my comment to providing links to any changes. Therefore, I think they have stopped this morning. Maybe you would know actually? The changes this person is always making is to the status of Summer Rae - if you watch Total Divas that is - and her return to season four. They say she announced she was returning for the first half of the fourth season yet theres no proof, at all! Hence why I keep reverting their changes until legit proof has appeared. Have you heard anything about Summer Rae's return to the show? They said they watched the first look into season four on E! and said she announced on there she was coming back, yet I can't find any links or news or videos to justify that statement. Anyway, I have taken up enough of this space, once again, I apologize for my previous statements and thank you for the changes. Kind regards, MSMRHurricane ( talk) 19:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Yea thanks for everything n wat MrMS Hurricane said becuz I saw it n stuff n everything else. N thanks for doing n changing the Total Divas thing and I would look forward to working wit u n GOD Blessed.
Thanks, Valleryking Valleryking ( talk) 02:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
In a recent edit summary you unequivocally alleged that United States is abbreviated as U.S. (with periods), thus implying that that view is an invariable statement of universal truth.
Yes, sometimes United States is abbreviated as U.S. (with commas).
However, the rest of that truth is that often United States is abbreviated also as US (without periods).
Those two choices are alternative styles, each of which is correct and acceptable.
The periods in question are superfluous; that is, they do not serve a useful purpose, they get in the way, and they clutter up the typography.
The older style is to use the decorative or traditional periods, whereas the newer and current style is to omit those nonfunctional and unnecessary periods.
The Wikipedia MoS does not require the inclusion of periods in such abbreviations; on the contrary, it allows the omission of them.
The Chicago Manual and a number of other authorities call for the omission of those periods.
Bryan Garner, the dean among grammarians (and the most highly regarded one) in the USA, in his Modern American Usage, along with the MLA Style Manual and Guide to Scholarly Publishing, explains that the clear trend now is to omit the superfluous periods.
Further, the Merriam-Webster Style Manual comments that the use of U.S. (with periods) has in the past been an exception to the general principle of not inserting periods in such abbreviations.
Kate Turabian, the queen of the academic or scholarly style in the USA, presents the use of U.S. (with periods) in the past as a convention, a tradition, and an exception to the general principle.
The clear current trend (away from the periods) continues to grow.
It contributes to crispness, clarity, and conciseness, just as does the use of the sentence case in headings, which also started in contrast with the traditional or conventional title case.
To write or print US (without periods) places US squarely in line with USA, UK, UN, EU, USN, USMC, USAF, RCMP, and other such well established terms.
To edit boldly (an important concept at the Wikipedia) includes boldly using acceptable and growing current (albeit relatively new) trends when they make constructive improvements.
Recently I, as a devoted and serious fan of The West Wing, began watching the series again (at least the third time) in its entirety, usually one episode each day or night.
This time I decided to enhance the existing blurbs here (about the individual episodes), which contain many errors and inaccuracies.
While I do so, I'll continue to change U.S. (with periods) to US (without periods).
After I finish, then I'll have finished establishing an internal consistency of the use of US (without periods) throughout all seven seasons.
By the way, when I write about grammar and composition, I do so as a seasoned professional.
Although I'm a retired professor, I've long worked in a parallel concurrent area.
In 1953 I began as a writer, rewriter, ghostwriter, editor, and proofreader (first on student publications, eventually as an editor in chief of a newspaper at a major university), and I've continued in both commercial and academic publishing.
Also I have a website of my own, entitled
Bluehounds and Redhounds, which I created, and which I continue to develop as time allows.
In 2010 I belatedly retired from full-time work, but I still teach part-time (including remedial English) at a university, and I continue to edit, rewrite, ghostwrite, advise, and proofread, all at the professional level.
For example, last week I finished editing a 450-page book on a technical subject.
Whenever I say anything about grammar or composition, please take me seriously.
Now let's proceed as friends, and let's interact with each other in a cordial and respectful manner.
Even when we disagree with each other, let's do so without behaving in a disagreeable way.
Too often some other users at the Wikipedia cause or allow disagreements to degenerate into name-calling contests.
You and I can do better than that.
Best wishes,
Doc –
DocRushing (
talk) 19:10, 3 July 2015 (UTC).
DtG:
You've changed several of my links by dropping the pipe trick and the uppercase initial letters in the titles of the linked articles.
I agree with that form, I would have preferred to do it that way originally, and I did so earlier in my time at the Wikipedia.
However, several other users have "edited" some of my simple links by capitalizing the initial letters.
After a number of such instances I reluctantly started using the pipe trick to get a lowercase initial letter when required in runniing text.
I've unsuccessfully searched for a written reference in the Wikipedia "rulebook".
Where can I find a discussion of that point?
I prefer your way, and I'll do it that way in the future, but I'd like also to be ready with an answer the next time when another user changes one or more such links.
Thanks.
Doc –
DocRushing (
talk) 18:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Star Trek writers. Since you had some involvement with the List of Star Trek writers redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- BDD ( talk) 15:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing up those dead links :) Hey, I noticed we're the top two contributors to the article. Would you be interesting in working with me in an effort to get 24 to FA? Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 22:59, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Grazie for the redirects! Drmargi ( talk) 20:06, 14 July 2015 (UTC) |
Thanks for taking care of the redirects from last night's abortive merge. I was on my iPad, and it just wouldn't behave… and I just hate it when someone leaves a mess behind! I just got to my desktop, and saw you'd done them. Most appreciated! -- Drmargi ( talk) 20:07, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
The black color for the font of s11's article is a bit blinding for me. It makes the orange look neon or something. Change it to white? Callmemirela {Talk} ♑ 20:16, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Thanks for work on "Person to Person." T. Anthony ( talk) 13:24, 17 July 2015 (UTC) |
WP:COLOR requires WCAG AAA level "when feasible"; in "24" articles, it is not infeasible. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:22, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
"is approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees to apply to all Wikimedia projects. It may not be circumvented, eroded, or ignored by local policies... The Wikimedia Foundation prohibits discrimination against current or prospective users... on the basis of... disability". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:34, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your explanation. I see what do you actually want but please read/answer the following:
Thanks in advance. -- Obsuser ( talk) 20:44, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Drovethrughosts, according to Template:Infobox Television it says exactly:
“If such a program has not aired a new episode in 12 months, "present" can be changed to the date the last episode aired, using
. This does not imply the series has been cancelled, rather that the program "last aired" on that date.”
First of all I completely agree with you. I don't think this makes much sense, but it still exists unfortunately. When is saw it I immediately thought of Curb in particular then I start updating others such as Fargo and Arrested Development. As a side note please don't use original and revived terms when saying the original release as that is for the should only include air dates not text.
Thank You --
JohnGormleyJG (
✉) 19:22, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
first_aired
should contain only the date the show first aired on its original channel or network.
last_aired
should contain only the first air date of the show's last episode on its original channel or network. The instructions for
last_aired
further say to use "present" if the show is ongoing or renewed. A "revived" series is a renewed series so
|last_aired=present
is correct. This is why
this edit was inappropriate. Your edit to
Arrested Development (TV series) was correct. last_aired
should be {{end date|2013|5|26}} until such time as the next episode airs, when it should be changed to "present". --
AussieLegend (
✉) 20:15, 10 August 2015 (UTC)On the off chance you have an interest in working on individual episodes from season 2: Talk:True Detective (season 2). --- Another Believer ( Talk) 01:23, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello, fellow editor. With all due respect, in what universe are the cast tables cumbersome? You are the only editor who thinks that. You might not even know what I'm talking about since Criminal Minds isn't even one of your favorite shows, according to your page, but that isn't important at this point. The first time you changed the cast tables you did not explain your edit at all. That is not the way that information has been presented; the table has worked for many years, it disambiguates the information, making it easier to understand if you don't know the show as well as other fans, and the fact that it is "cumbersome" is a matter of your opinion. This way has worked for a long time, please don't change it.
I would be willing to take this to Wikipedia's administrators to explain the efficiency of the original cast table. Please stop changing it. It is disruptive editing, and it makes the information (although organized) more confusing to the average person, and is not based on logic, only opinion. This is not that I don't value you as an editor, I appreciate all you do for Wikipedia, but I care deeply about this show and how its information is presented, and yes you have the right to edit whatever page you want, but know that this particular edit is based only on opinion and is disruptive. Please stop reverting it, or it will be deferred as an act of edit warring. With all possible respect, Bef3481 Bef3481 ( talk) 16:14, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Drovethrughosts,
I know that you keep a close eye on many TV-related articles so I was wondering what you thought of the page move
here. I think generally the TV and comic book characters are kept separate but as a newer viewer of the series, I thought you'd know better what the standard was.
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:45, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
You keep reverting an update to the Series One ratings for The Missing back to the overnight ratings. The ratings I am providing are the BARB seven day consolidated ratings and are backed up by searching the BARB weekly top 30 page that I am providing as a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.227.141.99 ( talk) 14:24, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Care to weigh in Talk:Mr._Robot_(TV_series)#Fight_Club_Section? Trumpetrep ( talk) 03:38, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
The problem is, and the reason I moved that information, is that if you currently have "The second season consists of eight episodes and is scheduled to premiere on 28 September 2015 on Canal+ and 31 October 2015 on SundanceTV." in the lede paragraph, that's going to be a very long sentence by the time broadcasters in the UK, Australia, etc. have confirmed their airdates? Surely it would be far better to summarise it there, and move the airdates (which are, let's face it, trivia) to their own section? Black Kite (talk) 07:18, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Can you offer your opinion in this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 04:47, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
So I've been on this site for a long, long time now and I've come to realize that I actually fucking hate it. I have two jobs and an ill parent who is dependent on me, so lots and lots going on. This isn't really new, but lately it just seems like this site is nothing but childish bickering between immature, anonymous editors who have no real interest in making "good" articles, but just in getting their own way. Every single day on this site is nothing but frustration and I have much better things to do. So I'm done. I'm so fucking done. You are basically the only editor left on this whole site that I agree with or have even the smallest amount of respect for. It's been nice working with you the past few years. Look after everything. You can e-mail me at schrutedit12@hotmail.com if you wanna keep in touch or something. If not, job well done, man. I don't know how you put up with it. Peace out. SchrutedIt08 ( talk) 13:59, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi can i ask your reasoning for the removal of supernatural fiction from the X-Files seasons? The monster of the week episodes of the X-Files are indeed mainly supernatural fiction as well as the second film.-- Taeyebaar ( talk) 04:11, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Please see this topic and The X-Files: I Want to Believe-- Taeyebaar ( talk) 04:13, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Drove, I just posted on the DRN requesting the joke of a DR on BSG be closed. Twobells hasn't posted to it since January 22 and on Wikipedia since January 30. This has become a farce, and it's time to close it down. I hope it's acceptable that I commented that you and I both were OK with the article as it stood before all this started. -- Drmargi ( talk) 14:43, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I just wanted to stop by and express my deepest gratitude for the outstanding work you do on here. I feel like there is so much idiocy and monotony out there that editors like you need some form of positive reinforcement. If you ever need any assistance, don't hesitate ask. :) Cheers, LLArrow ( talk) 06:33, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Bases on my experience on wikipedia I have mostly seen the list of seasons listed as transmission see Gogglebox as one example. Thank You. JohnGormleyJG ( talk) 18:31, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello, the contribution that I posted today was not "uncited original research". Each of the two referenced websites stated the percentage of their critics who gave a positive rating to The Walking Dead; I noted the result of a simple (first grade?) math problem using those percentages. The referenced paragraph currently quotes from three negative reviews even though 83% of the reviewers gave the show a positive rating, hence my attempt to counteract this counterintuitive wrong and inject logic into the paragraph.
Hey, I see you dropped in the ratings for last nights episode, but I can't find the info on the cited TV by the Numbers site...? LLArrow ( talk) 23:12, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
Thanks for all the help, first of all! I think adding the italics around Veronica Mars in the titles of the episodes was a good idea. Secondly, The screenshot that I used for "
M.A.D." was recently tagged for deletion. I think it's appropriate, but could you possibly chime in with your thoughts on Files for Deletion? (It's February 11 by the way). Thanks in advance and I don't mind even if you think it should be deleted! :)
BenLinus
1214
talk 03:38, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your thoughtful attention to (and through source-referencing, largely settling) the "main" v. "recurring" character issue at the Marvel Agent's… articles. You may wish to take a moment and look at the "Fitz plot element important v. unimportant" Talk entry at the season 2 episodes article, as I think your fellow editor there is more willing to go with gut than reason or sources, on this separate issue. Otherwise, I'm done with these, and have nothing more to offer on either matter. Cheers, have enjoyed the education that you offered. 71.239.87.100 ( talk) 15:32, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello Drovethrughosts, I am inquiring form you is there any possible way for myself to become an administrator. I am aware there is a request form but not sure where it is. I came here as I know you are an administrator so I was hoping for you're help. Also if you have any tips on how to get qualified please tell me.
Thank You so much for your help JohnGormleyJG ( talk) 15:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
For specific examples:
You need to establish yourself much more, making quality edits with references, reverting vandalism, and following and understanding guidelines, etc. Hope you don't feel I was too harsh, but I wanted to be blunt and to-the-point, especially if you're seriously considering applying for admin. You also need to ask "why" you're looking to want to be an admin, what is it that you'd want to accomplish as admin that you can't as a regular editor. Always feel free to contact me for anything. :) Drovethrughosts ( talk) 17:28, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
Thank you so much for helping me with my Veronica Mars episode articles and being so nice about it! Now that I'm done with season one, I thought it it would be appropriate to send a little appreciation for your work! :) BenLinus 1214 talk 16:31, 17 February 2015 (UTC) |
I reduced it to the 27 February. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 21:49, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Jimthing ( talk) 23:09, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I could use your assistance over at American Horror Story: Hotel, that is if you agree. I have a bunch against me, and could use some fortitude. Thank you so much, LLArrow ( talk) 17:58, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
I noticed you changed a lot of work I done on the 24: Live Another Day page removing about 80% of the information. As it stands there is no plot summary, character discription or info on Almeida's fate. So may I just ask why you removed all of this. JohnGormleyJG ( talk) 20:05, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I don't know if youv'e seen, but Zap2it currently has an episode listed as 14 and airing Tuesday, April 21, 2015, called "March 8, 1983"; given that the date is a day before the season finale/13th episode is scheduled to air... What's your take on it? LLArrow ( talk) 01:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Why is this getting cut out? This seems pretty obvious to me and is quite sharp writing that makes it's point so deftly that it should get a gold star. Why an 'A' and not any other letter in the alphabet?
"This 'A' may allude to the Scarlet Letter (from the book of the same name and a writers room would have known this) and was the mark of infidelity. This is accompanied by the longing pop song Spicks and Specks by BeeGees which contains lyrics the likes of:
"Where is the sun...That shone on my head...Where is the light...And where are the friends..I could meet. Where are the girls I left far behind. All of my life I call yesterday..Of my life 've gone away"
As Rick presses his forhead against the wall and a zombie is on the other side the viewer is left with the impression that what Rick desires and loves is life outside the compound" and living within the walls is a lie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhaddonpearson ( talk • contribs) 16:52, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Why did you change the genres? Seemed pretty suitable and consistent with reviews. EauZenCashHaveIt ( I'm All Ears) 08:04, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
http://m.hitfix.com/whats-alan-watching/better-call-saul-creators-on-the-purposely-sh-ty-opening-title-sequence/3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikiFring ( talk • contribs) 22:35, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Why'd you undo the Season 2 info I made to "Halt and Catch Fire (TV Series)"? That took me a long time and it was sourced from imdb.com, which is as official as it gets? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muldfeld ( talk • contribs) 06:27, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
I thought the writers themselves generate it. Thanks for explaining. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muldfeld ( talk • contribs) 06:10, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
What do you recommend as a source? It's all over Google, as a given. You don't need a source to say the sky is blue. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:42, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
You reverted an edit of mine that you state was in the past. It is obviously in the past as this is a prequel to Breaking Bad but it occurs after the current events of Better Call Saul (2002). I just rewatched that very scene on Netflix and he states his name as Saul. Currently in Better Call Saul he has not changed his name yet hence this is in the future. Also in your edit summary you said it's seems you're not paying attention enough. Which strikes to me as very rude and I wouldn't let anyone talk to me like that especially I fixed an edit summary which you complained about for episode 3. JohnGormleyJG ( ✉) 21:41, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
In response to your comments on the Wings episodes page, I do agree that they need to cited. This is a very tedious process though, and could take a while to accomplish. All of these numbers came from http://tvaholics.blogspot.com. If you're not familiar with this website; it was used to cite ratings for shows such as Seinfeld, Frasier, and Beverly Hills, 90210 (the one I've been working on). All of the sources for the Wings episodes can be found in the references on these pages. If you want, you are more than welcome to copy them over yourself, or if you'd like, I could do it. If I do it, it could take a couple weeks, as there are 172 episodes, and I don't have unlimited time. Thank you! Rswallis10 ( talk) 21:32, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Why was it reverted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SanguineTWD ( talk • contribs) 17:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Are you changing all of the episode articles based upon cited information that Game of Thrones does not have production codes? If so, it would be great if you could link that source her, so as to prevent a massive revert of your production code removals. Thanks. - Jack Sebastian ( talk) 15:54, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Why did you revert my edits. Several characters who appeared in only one or two episodes, depending on what season they're in, counts as guest star.02:34, 1 April 2015 (UTC) 72.64.207.76 ( talk)
I was trying to fix everything especially adding in missing guest stars for each season. 72.64.207.76 ( talk) 20:07, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi DTG, I appreciate your comments re: Better Call Saul. For the record, I opened a discussion at Talk:Better Call Saul about the overly-wordy synopses a few days ago and invited Peace to participate. As a minor point, the 200-500 word range is for standalone episode articles that contain plot summaries (Example: Confirmed Dead). For tabular "list of episodes" articles the range is 100-200 words and the example given is Smallville (season 1). Anyhow, thanks again, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:00, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
You seem like a reasonable person (unlike many on Wikipedia), so I'm going to explain my reasoning behind the Live+SD Ratings table on the Empire episodes page. If you look at shows like Modern Family (season 6) and Scandal (season 4), they both have a Live+7 table as well as a Live+SD table, because they each serve different purposes. The Live+SD table holds the 18-49 demographic ratings, as well as the weekly 18-49 rank, and viewership rank, which cannot be found on the Live+7 table. The Live+SD table needs to be on the same page as the episode table, because the citations for the 18-49 demo rating are the same citations as the viewership numbers from the episode table. I do not like the fact that the 2 tables are on two different pages, but whenever a season 1 page is made, they can be moved together on the same page. Feel free to comment your thoughts on the matter. Thanks for your time. Rswallis10 ( talk) 23:01, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Heya, FYI: An ANI discussion re: editor Peace is contagious. Regards, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 02:54, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
This or this? — Wylie pedia 02:03, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I like your line 'promotes his new biz @ nursing home', I coudlnt' quite think of how to word that, good call ! Peace is contagious ( talk) 23:27, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to know why you deleted the edit with the "Gag Reel" special episode adding. It has its place in the eps list, I think. Thanks for the answer ! 78.247.98.33 ( talk) 19:08, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm very sorry - I wasn't trying to vandalize your page. I just wanted to add the information about Season 6 of "Through The Wormhole With Morgan Freeman" I had found online. I truly love this show. Karellen32 ( talk) 06:03, 23 April 2015 (UTC)Sandra Buskey, Karellen32
You are quite welcome. I'm glad you are watching the show. Descriptions for each episode can be found here: [1] I would insert them myself, but I cannot figure out how to edit tables. Karellen32 ( talk) 16:35, 23 April 2015 (UTC)Sandra Buskey, Karellen32
Did you make a mistake here? I think that the series just began its second season this last week. - Jack Sebastian ( talk) 16:25, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Would you be so kind as to explain why you removed the spoiler warning I added at the Strike Team header? I know the show is old, but not everybody has seen it all. While having a read through I read a couple of major plot developments that I wish I could unread, so my addition was made with a view to helping others to avoid that. I don't really see how a spoiler warning adversely affects the (well written) page.
Regards, Lore ( talk) 11:30, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Cleopatra Coleman is not a main character, but a recurring character, as she has been in only 5 episodes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Everythingever20 ( talk • contribs) 03:24, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
"main" cast status is determined by the series producers, not by popularity or screen time.This means that it doesn't matter whether she has appeared in one or one thousand episodes, if she is credited on-screen (the normal litmus test that we use) she is a starring character. As I've indicated on my talk page, Coleman has been credited on-screen by producers as a starring character. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 05:38, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey! You've been editing Wikipedia for quite a longer time than me, and I have a question for you. I believe you are familiar with how Wikipedia handles TV pages. I don't know how familiar you are with The Blacklist, but I am having a major problem with the most recent episode (the season finale). My TV listed the title of the episode as "Masha Rostova," yet during the intertile of the episode, it listed the title as "Tom Connolly." Zap2it lists it as "Tom Connolly," and The Futon Critic lists it as both (the original airing is titled "Tom Connolly" [1] and the rerun of it is listed as "Masha Rostova." [2] Throughout the day, the Wikipedia page has been changed at least 6 times between the two names. I was just wondering if you had any advice about how to handle this situation. This is quite similar to The Goldbergs season 1 finale situation, in which the title agreed upon was the one with the most references. Again, sorry to bother you, please let me know if you have any ideas, or can send me to someone who does. Thanks! Rswallis10 ( talk) 20:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Could you please provide the reasoning to revert my latest change? My version was supported by the detailed GoT wiki chapter-episode comparison. The version you restored was supported by a inactive link to the article which (even at the time it existed) provided an approximation written down at the very early stage of designing the season in question. How is this dead link a more believable source? Thanks. 83.27.130.225 ( talk) 21:27, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello Drovethrughosts,
I am just leaving this message regarding your recent change to
Curb Your Enthusiasm, according to
MOS:TV related is to be used only for remakes, spin-offs, and adaptations.
Seinfeld doesn't fit any of those categories. I completely understand that there are plenty of references and that reunion (sort-of) episode, but the actual show Curb Your Enthusiasm is not officially related to Seinfeld.
Thank You,
JohnGormleyJG (
✉)
09:42, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I was thinking that I could nominate some VM articles at GAN—namely, " A Trip to the Dentist", " Normal Is the Watchword", " My Mother, the Fiend", " Donut Run", and " The Rapes of Graff", as well as possibly " Weapons of Class Destruction" and " Rat Saw God". What do you think about that? Are they fine as is, or would you suggest removing the "cultural references" and "music" sections? Also, I just recently found out that the TV.com ref that I've been using has a section called "The plot thickens", which I could boil down, meaning that I could keep arc significance. I just wanted to get a second opinion. :) Thanks so much, BenLinus 1214 talk 13:06, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey there. The reason I uploaded a new version of the Game of Thrones season 5 cover was because the picture would be closer to a DVD Cover. The file I uploaded (without the 4.12 and HBO at the bottom) was not created by me, but is actually an image for the upcoming phsyical release of the season on Amazon.com. Although I could live with it, if we simply wait for an official DVD cover to be released. Greetings.-- 109.42.2.169 ( talk) 22:33, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me is not series, but it is part of Twin Peaks franchise.
For example:
movies are in episodes list.
This movie is part of Twin Peaks's plot, and will be in this table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lado85 ( talk • contribs) 12:31, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey, are you sure about that Happyish pilot thing? Normally "Interstitial break" refers to the 3 to 5 minutes after the previous episode run a few minutes short. Happyish started airing at 10pm, and not at 9.57 80.219.112.49 ( talk) 20:07, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
My goal here is to bring it up to speed with what I've seen in other featured articles, such as this one. I plan on rolling the format out to the other season articles. I'm open to suggestions of course, but I think per WP:BEGIN, we should strive for the bolded subject in the opening sentence to match closely the title of the article. It doesn't have to be verbatim of course, but this appears to be an acceptable way as evidenced in the example at that link above. What do you think? -- GoneIn60 ( talk) 15:57, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
The fifth season of The Walking Dead, a horror–drama television series on AMC, premiered on October 12, 2014, and concluded on March 29, 2015, consisting of 16 episodes.
Please take a look at Galactica's talk page before reverting again. Thanks!- 79.223.12.42 ( talk) 21:18, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
"there is no consensus to change this" - I'm baffled. Have you read the talk section? There is literally nobody who defends "reimagining". Please explain in the talk section.- 79.223.12.42 ( talk) 23:10, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed you undid an edit of mine on 24 (TV series). It contained distinguishing the revived series from the original. You said that there was “no reason for separation”. I am just curious why? All other TV shows I have come across that was revived separate the revived from the original, in a place like the overview. E.G. Whose Line Is It Anyway? (U.S. TV series). I personally think it is better this way as it more or less bullet points the key parts. So what is your opinion on this? Should I ask it on the 24 Talk Page instead? Thank You -- JohnGormleyJG ( ✉) 14:50, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I'll take your word for it that the first season link is working wherever you are - it wasn't working for me yesterday and it still isn't working for me today. The season two link has been working fine both days, but i've just found where the release date is on that one. Apologies. Just a heads up i'm actually going to be deleting that table before I finish working on the article and nominate it for GA, as I think it's rather pointless, I mean, it can be simplified to just say they were all released in 2003. Nobody is going to care about the minor differences in date between UK and US releases anyway. Freikorp ( talk) 13:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I just wanted to personally apologize for the hidden text I wrote on the Total Divas page acting as if that article was my own creation. I read the ownership article stating no one is a owner of anything, and realize my comment was unnecessary. Thank you for changing it and bringing me up to scratch with how an appropriate editor should behave. The reasons, however, for my previous actions were simply because a particular editor keeps changing and making unreliable edits to the page. After exchanging a few words with them, they still haven't made adjustments, hence my comment to providing links to any changes. Therefore, I think they have stopped this morning. Maybe you would know actually? The changes this person is always making is to the status of Summer Rae - if you watch Total Divas that is - and her return to season four. They say she announced she was returning for the first half of the fourth season yet theres no proof, at all! Hence why I keep reverting their changes until legit proof has appeared. Have you heard anything about Summer Rae's return to the show? They said they watched the first look into season four on E! and said she announced on there she was coming back, yet I can't find any links or news or videos to justify that statement. Anyway, I have taken up enough of this space, once again, I apologize for my previous statements and thank you for the changes. Kind regards, MSMRHurricane ( talk) 19:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Yea thanks for everything n wat MrMS Hurricane said becuz I saw it n stuff n everything else. N thanks for doing n changing the Total Divas thing and I would look forward to working wit u n GOD Blessed.
Thanks, Valleryking Valleryking ( talk) 02:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
In a recent edit summary you unequivocally alleged that United States is abbreviated as U.S. (with periods), thus implying that that view is an invariable statement of universal truth.
Yes, sometimes United States is abbreviated as U.S. (with commas).
However, the rest of that truth is that often United States is abbreviated also as US (without periods).
Those two choices are alternative styles, each of which is correct and acceptable.
The periods in question are superfluous; that is, they do not serve a useful purpose, they get in the way, and they clutter up the typography.
The older style is to use the decorative or traditional periods, whereas the newer and current style is to omit those nonfunctional and unnecessary periods.
The Wikipedia MoS does not require the inclusion of periods in such abbreviations; on the contrary, it allows the omission of them.
The Chicago Manual and a number of other authorities call for the omission of those periods.
Bryan Garner, the dean among grammarians (and the most highly regarded one) in the USA, in his Modern American Usage, along with the MLA Style Manual and Guide to Scholarly Publishing, explains that the clear trend now is to omit the superfluous periods.
Further, the Merriam-Webster Style Manual comments that the use of U.S. (with periods) has in the past been an exception to the general principle of not inserting periods in such abbreviations.
Kate Turabian, the queen of the academic or scholarly style in the USA, presents the use of U.S. (with periods) in the past as a convention, a tradition, and an exception to the general principle.
The clear current trend (away from the periods) continues to grow.
It contributes to crispness, clarity, and conciseness, just as does the use of the sentence case in headings, which also started in contrast with the traditional or conventional title case.
To write or print US (without periods) places US squarely in line with USA, UK, UN, EU, USN, USMC, USAF, RCMP, and other such well established terms.
To edit boldly (an important concept at the Wikipedia) includes boldly using acceptable and growing current (albeit relatively new) trends when they make constructive improvements.
Recently I, as a devoted and serious fan of The West Wing, began watching the series again (at least the third time) in its entirety, usually one episode each day or night.
This time I decided to enhance the existing blurbs here (about the individual episodes), which contain many errors and inaccuracies.
While I do so, I'll continue to change U.S. (with periods) to US (without periods).
After I finish, then I'll have finished establishing an internal consistency of the use of US (without periods) throughout all seven seasons.
By the way, when I write about grammar and composition, I do so as a seasoned professional.
Although I'm a retired professor, I've long worked in a parallel concurrent area.
In 1953 I began as a writer, rewriter, ghostwriter, editor, and proofreader (first on student publications, eventually as an editor in chief of a newspaper at a major university), and I've continued in both commercial and academic publishing.
Also I have a website of my own, entitled
Bluehounds and Redhounds, which I created, and which I continue to develop as time allows.
In 2010 I belatedly retired from full-time work, but I still teach part-time (including remedial English) at a university, and I continue to edit, rewrite, ghostwrite, advise, and proofread, all at the professional level.
For example, last week I finished editing a 450-page book on a technical subject.
Whenever I say anything about grammar or composition, please take me seriously.
Now let's proceed as friends, and let's interact with each other in a cordial and respectful manner.
Even when we disagree with each other, let's do so without behaving in a disagreeable way.
Too often some other users at the Wikipedia cause or allow disagreements to degenerate into name-calling contests.
You and I can do better than that.
Best wishes,
Doc –
DocRushing (
talk) 19:10, 3 July 2015 (UTC).
DtG:
You've changed several of my links by dropping the pipe trick and the uppercase initial letters in the titles of the linked articles.
I agree with that form, I would have preferred to do it that way originally, and I did so earlier in my time at the Wikipedia.
However, several other users have "edited" some of my simple links by capitalizing the initial letters.
After a number of such instances I reluctantly started using the pipe trick to get a lowercase initial letter when required in runniing text.
I've unsuccessfully searched for a written reference in the Wikipedia "rulebook".
Where can I find a discussion of that point?
I prefer your way, and I'll do it that way in the future, but I'd like also to be ready with an answer the next time when another user changes one or more such links.
Thanks.
Doc –
DocRushing (
talk) 18:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Star Trek writers. Since you had some involvement with the List of Star Trek writers redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- BDD ( talk) 15:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing up those dead links :) Hey, I noticed we're the top two contributors to the article. Would you be interesting in working with me in an effort to get 24 to FA? Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 22:59, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Grazie for the redirects! Drmargi ( talk) 20:06, 14 July 2015 (UTC) |
Thanks for taking care of the redirects from last night's abortive merge. I was on my iPad, and it just wouldn't behave… and I just hate it when someone leaves a mess behind! I just got to my desktop, and saw you'd done them. Most appreciated! -- Drmargi ( talk) 20:07, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
The black color for the font of s11's article is a bit blinding for me. It makes the orange look neon or something. Change it to white? Callmemirela {Talk} ♑ 20:16, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Thanks for work on "Person to Person." T. Anthony ( talk) 13:24, 17 July 2015 (UTC) |
WP:COLOR requires WCAG AAA level "when feasible"; in "24" articles, it is not infeasible. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:22, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
"is approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees to apply to all Wikimedia projects. It may not be circumvented, eroded, or ignored by local policies... The Wikimedia Foundation prohibits discrimination against current or prospective users... on the basis of... disability". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:34, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your explanation. I see what do you actually want but please read/answer the following:
Thanks in advance. -- Obsuser ( talk) 20:44, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Drovethrughosts, according to Template:Infobox Television it says exactly:
“If such a program has not aired a new episode in 12 months, "present" can be changed to the date the last episode aired, using
. This does not imply the series has been cancelled, rather that the program "last aired" on that date.”
First of all I completely agree with you. I don't think this makes much sense, but it still exists unfortunately. When is saw it I immediately thought of Curb in particular then I start updating others such as Fargo and Arrested Development. As a side note please don't use original and revived terms when saying the original release as that is for the should only include air dates not text.
Thank You --
JohnGormleyJG (
✉) 19:22, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
first_aired
should contain only the date the show first aired on its original channel or network.
last_aired
should contain only the first air date of the show's last episode on its original channel or network. The instructions for
last_aired
further say to use "present" if the show is ongoing or renewed. A "revived" series is a renewed series so
|last_aired=present
is correct. This is why
this edit was inappropriate. Your edit to
Arrested Development (TV series) was correct. last_aired
should be {{end date|2013|5|26}} until such time as the next episode airs, when it should be changed to "present". --
AussieLegend (
✉) 20:15, 10 August 2015 (UTC)On the off chance you have an interest in working on individual episodes from season 2: Talk:True Detective (season 2). --- Another Believer ( Talk) 01:23, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello, fellow editor. With all due respect, in what universe are the cast tables cumbersome? You are the only editor who thinks that. You might not even know what I'm talking about since Criminal Minds isn't even one of your favorite shows, according to your page, but that isn't important at this point. The first time you changed the cast tables you did not explain your edit at all. That is not the way that information has been presented; the table has worked for many years, it disambiguates the information, making it easier to understand if you don't know the show as well as other fans, and the fact that it is "cumbersome" is a matter of your opinion. This way has worked for a long time, please don't change it.
I would be willing to take this to Wikipedia's administrators to explain the efficiency of the original cast table. Please stop changing it. It is disruptive editing, and it makes the information (although organized) more confusing to the average person, and is not based on logic, only opinion. This is not that I don't value you as an editor, I appreciate all you do for Wikipedia, but I care deeply about this show and how its information is presented, and yes you have the right to edit whatever page you want, but know that this particular edit is based only on opinion and is disruptive. Please stop reverting it, or it will be deferred as an act of edit warring. With all possible respect, Bef3481 Bef3481 ( talk) 16:14, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Drovethrughosts,
I know that you keep a close eye on many TV-related articles so I was wondering what you thought of the page move
here. I think generally the TV and comic book characters are kept separate but as a newer viewer of the series, I thought you'd know better what the standard was.
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:45, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
You keep reverting an update to the Series One ratings for The Missing back to the overnight ratings. The ratings I am providing are the BARB seven day consolidated ratings and are backed up by searching the BARB weekly top 30 page that I am providing as a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.227.141.99 ( talk) 14:24, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Care to weigh in Talk:Mr._Robot_(TV_series)#Fight_Club_Section? Trumpetrep ( talk) 03:38, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
The problem is, and the reason I moved that information, is that if you currently have "The second season consists of eight episodes and is scheduled to premiere on 28 September 2015 on Canal+ and 31 October 2015 on SundanceTV." in the lede paragraph, that's going to be a very long sentence by the time broadcasters in the UK, Australia, etc. have confirmed their airdates? Surely it would be far better to summarise it there, and move the airdates (which are, let's face it, trivia) to their own section? Black Kite (talk) 07:18, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Can you offer your opinion in this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 04:47, 27 September 2015 (UTC)