User talk:Amaury/2017/August

2017 Archive Index: January • February • March • April • May • June • July • August • September • October • November • December

Publisher parameter in Template:Cite web

Disregard my previous suggestion of using |publisher=Screener for Zap2it / TV by the Numbers references. The publisher should be Tribune Media Entertainment if we add it. First occurrence of work/publisher should be linked and that should be good enough. nyuszika7h (talk) 12:04, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

User Mecj2

Amaury, please keep an eye out for the new editor, User:Mecj2. If these keeps up, we may need to seek a block, as they are continually ignoring WP:ACCESS in tables, even after being reverted on it. I can't tell if this is a WP:CIR case, or something worse, but they don't seem to be getting the message... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:32, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: It's time... to [1]. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:04, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

You could try taking this to WP:AIV – unfortunately, it may not work there (depends which Admin looks at it). However, if they keep this up, they'll definitely cross WP:3RR at one of these articles, and they can then be taken to WP:ANEW. I'm going to try one final warning... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:11, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: I think the IP at Booboo Stewart just now might be the same person. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:24, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: I'm thinking it's time to request semi-protection. Seeing the article history, I'd say it's totally warranted now. I've also left the IP a stern level three warning. Amaury (talk | contribs) 20:37, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Go for it. Looks justified. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:55, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall:  Done. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:03, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: Guess who's back? Unfortunately, they can bypass semi-protection. It's also been 10 days since your final warning, so I don't know if that's stale now and they should be warned again or reported or what. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:51, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Start warning again, for disruptive editing. If they keep at it, they can maybe be taken to WP:ANEW (for "edit warring" rather than technical 3RR). But either that or WP:ANI will be dicey, unless they really go crazy with the edit warring. This one will probably just need to be continuous reverted, as they refuse to discuss... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:57, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: Warned. Amaury (talk | contribs) 22:31, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

 Reported to ANI. Enough is enough. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:57, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

IJBall. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:57, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Are you in the process of writing the report? I don't see one at ANI yet... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:12, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: It's at the bottom: [2]. Feel free to add on. Amaury (talk | contribs) 20:13, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

OK, I see – you said "ANI", but you mean "AIV". Let's see what happens with this... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:22, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

OK, I've had enough – we need to report this one. But I don't know where – AIV declined the last one, and AN3RR doesn't really apply. And I know if we take it to ANI it'll probably just get ignored. But the editing here is both disruptive, and WP:CIR-failing... --IJBall (contribs • talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:37, 25 August 2017‎ (UTC)

Any ideas here, Amaury? – This editor's continued disruptive editing merits a block by this point IMO... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:21, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: I agree. I'll ping Oshwah as he's the one who rejected my earlier report at AIV and see what he thinks now that their disruption has continued and has been going on long enough. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:25, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

FTR, in addition to once again ignoring WP:ACCESS at Cameron Boyce yesterday (as you caught), he later tried the same thing at Sofia Carson here after you reverted him at Cameron Boyce. Please make clear to Oshwah that he's been warned about this multiple times, and continues to ignore the warnings (or, at least, point Oshwah to this discussion on your Talk page). Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:28, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

And now someone (else) is needed at Sofia Carson, as I can't be the only one to keep reverting this guy – but once again, making a series of edits ignoring WP:ACCESS... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:15, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. I'll keep eyes out; let me know if disruption continues and I'll take action. I didn't think the disruption at the time warranted action; it's clear that it will if it continues. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:10, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

OK, they made this change at Lucy Hale. Looks like they swapped the year column (which is being rowspanned) with another column in a couple of discography tables. Though I have hesitated to revert where rowspan is concerned, from my understanding of the talk about WP:ACCESS, rowspan seems to be OK where it concerns the first column in a table but nowhere else. I definitely run into rowspan a lot with the tables at various Billboard articles, but haven't bothered to remove rowspan or confine it to the first column (or whatever is acceptable per WP:ACCESS); perhaps someday I'll be going thru those tables and make them conform to WP:ACCESS. But in any case, yet another disruptive edit from Mecj2. MPFitz1968 (talk) 21:05, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

@Oshwah: Pinging as requested. See message directly above. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:08, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Yep, that is an example of them doing it again. They've earned a block for that, IMO. (Thought, FTR, there are still WP:ACCESS issues with some of those tables at Lucy Hale – I may, or may not, try to get around to fixing those soon...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:34, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Madison Hu

Got some disruptive editing over there from a new editor insisting upon adding unsourced bio info. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:53, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: I already noticed it because I was stalking you—I mean, uh, just looking through your contributions!—and was about to revert when I saw a notification and figured it had to be you. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:55, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

[3] Beastmaster1994 (talk) 01:05, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

@Beastmaster1994: IMDb is not considered to be a "reliable source" either – see WP:RS/IMDb. Same reason as why Wikia are no good: WP:USERGENERATED. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:07, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Nicky, Ricky, Dicky & Dawn

Nickelodeon Productions is Nickelodeon's production company. So, I was correct to put it there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.127.69.194 (talk) 15:02, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The network a series airs on automatically makes it the production company, so it's not necessary to list it there. Only list the companies that are specific to the series. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:13, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

But that's not true at all. Winx airs on Nick, yet it is not produced by them. Also, think of SpongeBob. His page has Nick as a production company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.127.69.194 (talk) 15:21, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

All series that have the Nickelodeon title card at the end are considered Nickelodeon productions. It is not necessary to list it as a production company—and it shouldn't be. Same with other networks. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:25, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It has a similar relationship to Nickelodeon that "It's a Laugh Productions" has to Disney Channel and "Nickelodeon Animation Studios" does to Nickelodeon for their animation productions. As far as I can tell it is a valid operational production operation separate from the broadcast functions of Nickelodeon and not just a vanity label like the production companies owned by the executive producers usually are. IMDb treats them as a production company. I think if it is in the credits we shouldn't be second guessing them although I dislike listing the vanity companies that are also listed. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:55, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Huh. Interesting. I thought Nickelodeon Productions was more similar to Disney Channel Original since it's also the last card shown because I think there have been some series that aren't It's a Laugh Productions, whereas almost all of the Nickelodeon and Disney Channel series have the Nickelodeon Productions and Disney Channel Original cards at the end. Although, if you ask me, I don't even really think it's necessary to list the production companies at all. That doesn't really add anything to the series, in my opinion. The network a series airs on does give us useful information, but the production companies, not so much. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:15, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Its different than the copyright ownership card. As for listing them, they are in the template although we don't have to use all attributes. I was checking featured articles for guidance and note Adventure Time lists Cartoon Network Studios as a production company. Instructions for the template attribute "Company" are pretty expansive on what is permitted and desired there. I think we are on firmer ground to include contents for templated attributes reflecting what is in the credits as selectively excluding credited stuff gets a bit into personal evaluations of importance. My 2cents. (to add) The Disney Channel Original looks to be just a branding label. Nickelodeon Productions looks to be an actual entity that does production work. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:37, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Based on that, I think it would be fair to list Nickelodeon Productions in the Production Company field for Nickelodeon's series. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:51, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

I agree as long as it is verified that that credit is actually shown as part of the credit sequence in the episodes for a given series. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:53, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

On the Descendants 1 and 2 pages (and most other DCOMS and Disney Channel shows pages), the company says "Disney (XD, Junior, Channel) Original" or "Disney (XD, Junior, Channel) Original Production(s)". So im really not sure on that one. --2.127.69.194 (talk • contribs) 21:04, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

WP:REDNOT

The wording has changed over there regarding red linking people's names and there was a discussion at WT:REDLINK#RfC: Red links for persons about it, where the consensus was to allow red links on people's names. Not that Mecj2's edit at Descendants 2 shouldn't have been reverted—I would've done the same, as I didn't see any of the redlinked names as likely to have articles created since it is unlikely they would pass Wikipedia's notability guidelines at this point. MPFitz1968 (talk) 20:54, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't think anything has changed – under WP:REDNOT it still says: "Do not create red links to articles that are not likely to be created and retained in Wikipedia... and "As with other topics, red links can be added to persons who could plausibly have articles..." (emphasis mine) AFAIAC, nothing has really changed, and I'm still going to be removing redlinks to people as before, as most of the articles with redlinks that I come across are linking to people who are not notable (as far as Wikipedia guidelines are concerned...). (Full disclosure: I !voted against allowing redlinks in the RfC in question, and still think this policy change is YA stupid idea. FWIW...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:02, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Of course (see User talk:Geraldo Perez § Descendants 2 and User:Mecj2 for more) an easy workaround to having redlinks is create a redirect back to where you add the link so that the link is blue. We are not supposed to link to rebounds but that guideline is a bit ambiguous for redirects with possibilities. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:29, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Please don't. My custom stylesheets highlight any links to self-redirects with a green background screaming "Unlink me!" :P nyuszika7h (talk) 14:28, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

User Orchomen

He is been relatively quiet now. Pretty much consistent at this point. I thought about requesting a site ban and I wanted your thoughts. He's clearly not here to contribute in a collborative manner and we are always at SPI or requesting blocks through the page meant for all of his sockpuppets. Also pinging users involved with Orchomen for more thoughts: @Sro23:, @IJBall: and @MPFitz1968:. Callmemirela 🍁 ^talk 00:33, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

@Callmemirela: Sounds fine to me. They are very clearly WP:NOTHERE and will never be. Good faith should never be assumed with them. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:46, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Support. MPFitz1968 (talk) 00:51, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

I finally got to it! WP:AN#Request site ban for Orchomen. Callmemirela 🍁 ^talk 04:06, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

The verdict has been reached: Orchomen is banned [4]. MPFitz1968 (talk) 01:00, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

List of Liv and Maddie characters

Extra eyes needed here, please. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:06, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

The Loud House

This is my favorite show but I need you to add List of The Loud House Characters because the characters are filling up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1001:B02D:B906:D0F8:9F16:9D59:A0E (talk) 23:30, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Audio format

I've never really cared much about this, as I don't have a surround sound system, but it seems like Nickelodeon mostly only releases stereo (2.0) audio on digital platforms (e.g. Amazon/iTunes), but at least for some shows, there is still 5.1 audio when they air on TV. Disney has 5.1 audio for most of their shows and movies, but there are outliers like Zapped. – nyuszika7h (talk) 14:37, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

List of Lab Rats characters

First episode appearance stuff is definitely relevant to a character page like this IMO, and I think last episode appearance info is equally relevant, at least for recurring characters, or "main" cast that join the show late or leave the show early. That said, this kind of thing needs to be integrated into the prose write-up for the character, not broken out into a list... (Unless the {{Infobox television character}} is used, but that's a special case.) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:37, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Also, "last appearance" wouldn't probably be appropriate for a character like Bob – Bob actually shows up again in Lab Rats: Elite Force, so there really isn't a "final" appearance on Lab Rats, so to speak... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:39, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Distributor parameter in Template:Infobox television

Why some Disney Channel and Disney XD show don't need distributor at all? Show that air on network and cable need distributor. I can't find anywhere that has proof. This is how i know. Production television company are owned by the media conglomerate so it most TV show need distributor. Why you have undo my edit? Sorry, my English is not very good. --Jasonnguyen2606 (contribs • talk) 12:35, 17 August 2017 (ICT)

Sofia Carson

That looks to be a static IPv6 address from the IP editor. I've just given them a level 2 warning. If they do it again, I think you can skip straight to a "final warning". After that, I'd report the IP to WP:AIV. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:56, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Episodes need to be listed in order of air dates at Talk:List of Special Agent Oso episodes

Note: I'm going to pipe you in on this discussion too, as I think many of the same issues that came up at List of The Loud House episodes (e.g. how to order "segments" when they are split across different "episodes") also come up again at this article... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:37, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Raven's Home

Hi User:Amaury, I have no idea why you reverted my edit. I saw you commented in the edit history that a Disney Channel press release called it a comedy. However, another Disney Channel press release from that same website you sourced also calls it a sitcom. See here: [5]. It states: ""Raven's Home," a sitcom for kids and families that brings powerhouse star Raven-Symoné back to Disney Channel to reprise the role of Raven Baxter from the iconic comedy series "That's So Raven," premieres FRIDAY, JULY 21 (10:00-10:30 p.m. EDT), on Disney Channel, and will be available on the Disney Channel App, VOD and Disney Channel YouTube (12:01 a.m. EDT)..." And it also quoted the executive vice president of original programming at Disney Channel calling it a "family sitcom." So, please revert back my edit. Thank you. ATC ^{. Talk} 01:52, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

No, you are making controversial and overall non-improving edits that need to be discussed on the talk page. Today is the second time you've done this. You should also learn how to use proper edit summaries. Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:58, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

@ATC: There is no functional difference between "comedy" and "sitcom" in this context, and WP:TONE might suggest using the word "comedy" over "sitcom" if there is sourcing support for the former term. In this case, I agree with Amaury that leaving it as "comedy" in the genre is preferable. (Now, OTOH, your source would support adding "Family" as a genre.) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:22, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

I prefer sitcom (situation comedy) as it is much more descriptive of this type of show. Comedy shows include sitcoms but sitcom is more specific. Sitcom is supported by references too. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:29, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

I personally tend to dislike the use of "sitcom", as I view it as an "industry term", but I wouldn't oppose its use if there's consensus for it... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:35, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: I've given them a warning now for their latest stunt. @Geraldo Perez: I wouldn't be opposed, either, if there's consensus. At first I was going by the genres on Zap2it—and they even have Raven's Home as a comedy—but shifted to using the press releases after IJBall thought Zap2it wasn't 100% accurate as it labels Andi Mack a sitcom. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:23, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

By the way, please see my latest suggestion on Talk:Raven's Home#Reparaphrasing_the_lead_section. ATC ^{. Talk} 18:12, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

List of Mighty Med episodes

Why say this, when, a month ago, you said this? Are you going to suggest all your future revisions on the talk page, hmm? — Wyliepedia 04:28, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @CAWylie: I think your second link points to the wrong place. But if you're referring to the removal of absence tallies, that's something that has been agreed on at Talk:List of K.C. Undercover episodes § Absences. We agreed that such counts are really more trivial and similar to keeping an episode count in cast listings which should not be done per a relatively recent MOS:TVCAST revision. However, a main character being absent from an episode is an equally important piece of information as guest stars for that episode. Now, you may argue that guest stars shouldn't be listed for each episode either, and many have argued this in the past. But we're not suggesting that they should be included for all shows – live action Disney and Nickelodeon shows have reasonably-sized guest star listings and co-star credits are used insignificant background roles, which we do not list (if you see them on any articles, feel free to remove them – they may be old remnants or disruptive editing by editors who insist on their inclusion). For animated series, obviously we don't list every single guest stars, because those tend to lump a lot of voice actors with both important and minor roles together under "With the voice talents of". I don't know about other networks' shows, since I've never really kept count of per-episode guest stars for those. nyuszika7h (talk) 11:22, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

My second link is correct. Amaury reverted my edit because it was "arbitrary", so I came here to ensure his "get[ting] around to cleaning up this article again" is properly discussed first. — Wyliepedia 11:48, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm not arbitrarily removing anything, I'm just cleaning up the article in regard to making it more neat and tidy and the like, something I've been doing on articles for a few years now. That is pretty minor compared to removing a bunch of a valid information. Not every single thing needs to be discussed, but major changes like that do need to be discussed. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:49, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Jack Griffo

This site is not available.— vsco 08:12, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

@Vsco: Confirmed, and  Done – I've removed it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:43, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

For future reference, though, be sure to use edit summaries for things like that as it otherwise appears that you're just randomly removing content, something that's typical vandal behavior. Don't expect others to read your mind. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:51, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

User Egbodo huddy

One more edit like this or the disruptive editing at the article Talk pages, and I would advise reporting this one to WP:AIV as a vandalism-only account. I almost just did that myself, right now, but I thought better of it, and decided to give them one more chance (or WP:ROPE...). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:51, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

I saw that edit, which was imbedded in one of my warnings to them, and Jim1138 reverted and gave them the final warning for the personal attack. I'm under the same impression that if they do one more disruptive edit (including coming to any of our talk pages), they will be reported. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:14, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

If I had checked Eh's other edits, I probably would have reported to AIV citing wp:NOTHERE. NOTHERE in those circumstances often results in an indef. I only gave one warning re edits to Big Time Rush (band) as the two were close together. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 19:28, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

List of Henry Danger episodes

Not quite sure about taking this to WP:RPP yet, but there have been a lot of edits mainly by IPs reverted in the last 10 days or so, often for addition of unsourced air dates for upcoming episodes (which Zap2it still shows without air dates). At least one autoconfirmed that was recently reverted complicates things. Article seems to be experiencing a bit more activity, pretty much unconstructive, than I should normally see for a show that has been on a break - no new episodes since April. The last 50 revisions in the history are on or after August 16, but at this point, I think I'll hold off for a little while on requesting semiprotection, unless it looks more warranted for that by you, GP or IJBall. MPFitz1968 (talk) 21:12, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: I've requested semi-protection. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:13, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: By the way, this has also been a problem on List of Game Shakers episodes, which is also returning. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:15, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: One thing I find strange is that Nickelodeon's September schedules haven't been posted yet even though we know at least Henry Danger and Game Shakers are returning and I Am Frankie is premiering as, on top of the general fall promo, they've been airing promos for those shows for a little while now. Zap2it usually has Disney Channel's schedules for the following month up pretty early because, from what Geraldo Perez told me quite a while ago, they used to be an official outlet for Disney Channel. While they no longer are, they seem to still get early info. Disney Channel's schedules for the following month are usually up around the 10th. For example, Disney Channel's September schedules were available on August 8. Zap2it wasn't an official outlet for Nickelodeon, but their schedules for the following month don't seem to follow even a relative release pattern. Sometimes they'll be mid-month (around the 15th), sometimes they'll be mid-late month (around the 20th), and sometimes they'll be the month of (see, for example, when I added the March schedules). Taking a look at the history of Henry Danger's episode list, September 2016's schedules were available August 26, 2016. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:23, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Bunk'd and Stuck in the Middle (TV series)

Here's a reliable secondary source, finally! for the renewals of Bunk'd and SitM: Deadline. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:41, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

I just saw someone on Twitter retweeting Deadline's tweet for the renewal of Stuck in the Middle, Bunk'd, and Walk the Prank, but I see you already added that info to the articles. ;) I don't watch Walk the Prank, but I recently finished the first two seasons of Bunk'd and I still need to watch the second season of Stuck in the Middle. nyuszika7h (talk) 17:05, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @IJBall: Fucking finally! Pardon my French! Without being able to see the targeted audience demos (2-11), we can't really say how good or bad they were doing, but I guess Disney Channel knows that Nielsen's change last fall is what had the largest impact on their ratings, at least for what we could see: total viewers. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:12, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: That's two Disney Channel shows to stop "worrying" about. Now we just need to see if K.C. Undercover and Bizaardvark are renewed, though it's too early to tell with both of them. Raven's Home will definitely be renewed as, and you might have noticed this, second seasons are basically mandatory with Disney Channel. Also, I don't know if you saw this, but it might not hurt to keep a little extra eye on Bunk'd: Live-action comedy BUNK’D, from executive producer Pamela Eells O’Connell, follows siblings Emma, Ravi and Zuri Ross as they leave their extravagant New York City penthouse once again to return to Camp Kikiwaka, a rustic summer camp in Maine. Season three finds the Ross kids arriving at camp after several cabins were lost to fire. It stars Peyton List as Emma Ross, Karan Brar as Ravi Ross, Skai Jackson as Zuri Ross and Miranda May as Lou. Emphasis mine. Notice that three actors are missing, but I think it's a typo or something. We'll know 100% when it premieres, though. Pinging the others as well on this: Geraldo Perez, MPFitz1968, Nyuszika7H. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:28, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

@Nyuszika7H: Bunk'd is the bigger wow factor here as usually season renewals are officially announced while the current season is still airing new episodes. The only other case of a season renewal not being announced until after the current season had ended was Austin & Ally's fourth season, but not a lot of time passed when it was announced. If you took a look at the discussions I raised on the episode list talk pages of both of these shows, Bunk'd was apparently renewed back in March. If that's the case, I don't know why they delayed the announcement for so long. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:12, 31 August 2017 (UTC)