User talk:Amaury/2017/March

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

Andi Mack

I agree with your revert here [1], and for the record, the source about it being available on-demand on March 10 is in the first one cited to back the official air date on Disney Channel, set for April 7 (from Entertainment Tonight). Still, it is the IP's responsibility to do that, plus they inserted the text in front of other citations which did not support the on-demand date, but supported the sentence before that. My other issue was I wasn't sure that info belonged in the lead; doesn't it belong in the production section? MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:38, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: Yeah, it kind of falls under the same category as season renewal announcements, so it also belongs in the Production section. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:43, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Just to piggyback on another Andi Mack-related discussion, why is it not OK to have the director and writer information for the pilot?, considering that the first 2 episodes of the series have been released early. And by the way, since I made that edit I have watched the second episode with Paul Hoen and Terri Minsky also credited director and writer for that episode as well, respectively. QuasyBoy (talk) 18:48, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

@QuasyBoy: It's to do with the fact that it's hard to verify what's been added—and I'm not trying to imply that you or anyone else are adding incorrect information, but it's just hard to verify with online releases—so it's always best to wait until a series' actual network premiere on cable and satellite as that is the date we use for any series' premiere date, anyway, and the same goes for general episode premieres and season or series finale premieres. I'll invite the rest of my group to this discussion and they can provide further feedback if they have any: Geraldo Perez, IJBall, Nyuszika7H, MPFitz1968. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:40, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, it's probably better that those be sourced to something (sometimes The Futon Critic will have that info...) until it actually airs "on TV". But if it's already released online, keeping this kind of info in or out becomes a more borderline question IMO. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:44, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Usually, I wait until Disney Channel airs an episode to disclose the credits in Wikipedia per WP:CRYSTAL, even though I see it on Watch Disney a number of hours earlier and jot down the credits then. Did the same with the Andi Mack episodes, despite needing to wait four weeks for it to finally air on Disney Channel, probably even longer for the second episode. The difference here is that the first episode is not only available on Watch Disney, or the Disney app ... even Disney Channel's YouTube channel has it, which was planned, and is pretty much accessible to anyone to watch. So not sure I see a problem disclosing the credits for that one, as long as it's sourced back to that. As for the other episode, I'd still wait, as only Disney Channel subscribers (thru their satellite/cable/IPTV provider) can see it. MPFitz1968 (talk) 19:57, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

User talk:Oshwah

Are you seriously removing a section from another editors talkpage without letting them see it based on an essay? AusLondonder (talk) 19:03, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Can I re-add it and cite User:DESiegel/Template the regulars? AusLondonder (talk) 19:05, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

User DJV11181988

When you reverted their edits regarding Best Friends Whenever [2][3][4] and their continuing to mark it cancelled even without our having any reliable source to that effect, I had thoughts you were going to report them at WP:AIV. I was watching that, but the admins took no action against them (as in they are not blocked) ... but a note accompanied your entry in AIV about them having conflict of interest notices on their talk page [5]. My thought was to report them if I had done a revert, but it wouldn't have been AIV, since some admins may not take action if their edits don't constitute vandalism (though some will block for clear disruptive editing even if not obvious vandalism). As I've seen their edits as part of a content dispute instead, flagging them for edit warring might have been better, but admins are hesitant to take action if they aren't clearly violating 3RR (or close to it). Problem is others are also making the same edits about BFW's apparent cancellation at the articles DJV11181988 has been making them. A report at WP:ANI? Probably what I would've gone with, though I was hesitant about that, too, since I would've had to notify them and bring up a bunch of diffs about their edits - and at the moment, I don't have too much time to do that. Hard to say whether the admins would've acted on the report there either, and given how DJV11181988 has not communicated with us regarding their edits, I honestly don't know how that'll go. Might wanna try ANI anyway next time they make those edits. Reporting them for edit warring might be a possibility, too, except (again) they are far from violating 3RR itself, since they keep making these edits too far apart. Just my two cents. MPFitz1968 (talk) 06:30, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

User Mosharof.sherpur

Regarding your report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Doesn't necessarily look like vandalism to me, if you look at his further edits. May be a complete new editor, who doesn't know what they are doing. I don't know how to contest at AIV, so I thought I'd drop you a note, as I'm heading to bed. Nfitz (talk) 08:12, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and now I'm up to see that User:Materialscientist has blocked indefinitely. Is that a bit harsh for what may have been honest mistakes which may have later been rectified? With no warning? (GiantSnowman's warning on their talk page was for the following edit). Nfitz (talk) 12:11, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Legendary Dudas

Hey, do you think you're going to get to switching the episodes table at Legendary Dudas to the second format like here? I still think it would be a good idea to switch the tables to the second version in your sandbox. Just sayin'... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:20, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: Like I was just saying with you about changing from "Episode list" to "Episodes"? . I can do it today sometime. I'm sorry for the wait. PS: I was referring to Paradise Run on your talk page. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:58, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

No worries – WP:NODEADLINE. I was just wondering if it had slipped your mind... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:59, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: In case you're not watching the article,  Done earlier. Amaury (talk | contribs) 07:29, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

List of Lab Rats characters

It looks like this one could use some trimming – e.g. Tank and Lexi appeared in no more than 2 episodes, and thus don't qualify as "recurring". This is another one of those cases like List of Girl Meets World characters, where characters like this could be mentioned in prose-form in something like a 'Other villains' section or something... (And, as with List of Girl Meets World characters, this is one of those tasks on my informal mental "To Do" list that I may never end up getting to!...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:04, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: Agreed. Tidying up that page is something I need to get around to, anyway, so I'll take a look at it then. On the subject of trimming, I also feel like the leads for both Liv and Maddie and Girl Meets World could be trimmed considerably to be more like on K.C. Undercover, Stuck in the Middle, etc.—a basic outline containing the network, when the series premiered, who the series stars and was created by, etc. Anything further should go in the "Plot" or other appropriate sections, in my opinion. Amaury (talk | contribs) 20:14, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

On the other hand, it looks to me like the lede at Bizaardvark needs to be fleshed out a bit more – it's pretty bare-bones... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:15, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Hunter Street (TV series)

Extensive Discussion

Hey, did you catch where this one is supposed to be set? The 'intercut' scenes show trams, so I'm guessing Amsterdam. But did they say in the pilot?... TIA! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:55, 14 March 2017 (UTC) Got it! The lady cop says Amsterdam at the end of episode #2. Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:59, 14 March 2017 (UTC) I'm one of the creators of the show http://www.imdb.com/title/tt6622316/, yet you keep removing my (and my co-creator's) credit. As for the setting: Hunter Street is a Dutch production, the entire show was written and shot in the Netherlands/Amsterdam with a Dutch crew, back-to-back with the 'De Ludwigs'. Even most of the actors are (partially) Dutch. The country of origin is therefore The Netherlands, not the US. Reintws (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2017 (UTC) IMDB is not a reliable source. You're also not allowed to edit the article—it's heavily discouraged—because you have a WP:CONFLICT if what you say is even true. Amaury (talk | contribs) 13:28, 14 March 2017 (UTC) Amaury, well yes, and no – Reintws can definitely post Talk page messages to editors like you and myself to request corrections. In any case, I've gone ahead and removed an mention of nationality for now – the fact is, none of our current sources actually indicate that this is an "American production" either. So, because nationality is being challenged, it's probably best just to leave it out for now... As for the creators credit, I forget to look for that last night, but the credits should definitely easily verify things like creators and composers. I've deleted my copies from last night already – anyone still have the first two episodes handy to check the credits? (If not, I'll record tonight's episode to look for those...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:33, 14 March 2017 (UTC) @IJBall: I'm recording the series, just haven't watched the first two episodes yet. I'm so behind. I still haven't watched Ride, finished Paradise Run season two, gotten caught up on Mech-X4, finished the Lab Rats (I'm on season three) and Lab Rabs: Elite Force marathon that aired back in October, or watched the Legends of the Hidden Temple movie. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:20, 14 March 2017 (UTC) Heh – I also still haven't watched the final episode of Ride yet. In any case, it looks like Reintws did provide a source on my Talk page that seems to confirm that both the Dutch-language series and the English version are Dutch productions (though based on the translation from the Dutch, I'm not sure those exact words are used...), so I'll go ahead and put it in as a Dutch production at the article using the source provided. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:25, 14 March 2017 (UTC) You know, if Hunter Street gets a second season, the suggestion that we should maybe move "Clued In: A Hunter Street Special" to a "special" line in a Series overview table, a la "Girl Meets Demolition", probably has merit. But, until that point, you're right – we should leave it where it is in the episodes list... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:08, 18 March 2017 (UTC) @IJBall: I don't think this was advertised as a special by Nickelodeon, just as a catch-up to what's happened thus far, similar to the clip show episodes you see in other series, such as former series The Legend of Korra during book four. The other problem here is that it's not in-between seasons like with Girl Meets World's special, so it would seem a little awkward to have the table go as far as, I'm guessing, April (since there are 20 episodes, excluding Friday's episode) and then have a special table below with March 17, 2017. It would just seem out of order, but maybe that's just me. Amaury (talk | contribs) 04:26, 19 March 2017 (UTC) It's the only way to do it – specials like this air in the middle of seasons all the time: see for example: List of Once Upon a Time episodes#Specials or List of The Vampire Diaries episodes#Specials (though it looks like these two don't include the "specials" in the 'Series overview' table – hmmm...). But if the title really is "Clued In: A Hunter Street Special", the verification that it's a "special" is right there in the title... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:43, 19 March 2017 (UTC) @IJBall: Hm. Valid point. And as you say, we should wait and see if the series is renewed. (I can see it happening as it's doing better than Ride did, but I think Ride also did well for an imported series. Just like the ratings you see for Crashletes and Jagger Eaton's Mega Life, I think it also received fair ratings for the type of series that it is.) For example, there are going to be 20 episodes, so if all 20 season one production codes are used, then it's definitely a special, but if one season one production is missing, say, for argument's sake, 119, then it could be argued that the special was production code 119, but because it was a special, it was labeled with a special production code, similar to "The Haunted Thundermans" (S2), "A Hero Is Born" (S2), "Thundermans: Secret Revealed" (S), and "Thundermans: Banished!" (S4) over at List of The Thundermans episodes or the Henry Danger series premiere having a special production code, but being part of the first season (and the same kind of deal with some of its other episodes). Amaury (talk | contribs) 05:02, 19 March 2017 (UTC) Agreed. Right now, it looks like it has a "special" production code. But if there's only 19 other episodes, then this "special" is meant to be one of the 20. But if it's "#21", then it's definitely a "special", and not a "season 1" episode... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:31, 19 March 2017 (UTC) Looks like your most recent update to the episode list answered this question – this was as "special", and not part of the 20-episode season #1. If it gets picked up for season #2, then this "special" should be pulled out of the season #1 list, and put in its own subsection, a la List of Once Upon a Time episodes#Specials, etc. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:55, 23 March 2017 (UTC) Obviously not saying you're wrong or that even though other articles don't set precedence over others, it hurts to use some of them for examples, but I'm still torn on this because we have some specials on other series being counted in the normal seasons. For example, have a look through List of Henry Danger episodes which has some hour specials, and I guess two-parters are advertised as specials a lot of times, such as "Space Invaders" being advertised as a two-part special, though it has "normal" production codes. Other examples include List of The Thundermans episodes and List of Nicky, Ricky, Dicky & Dawn episodes. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:05, 23 March 2017 (UTC) Geraldo Perez, MPFitz1968, Nyuszika7H, any feedback you guys may be able to provide? See the discussion thus far above as this is certainly a tricky one. Specials are usually indicated by a "special" production code, but then you have things like the two-parter statement mentioned above, where there are "normal" production codes. Should all specials be listed in separate tables or only specials that are in-between seasons where it seems to be clear they're part of neither season? I also feel like the date plays a role. For example, there were no new episodes after The Thundermans' season three finale on August 13, 2016, until October 10, 2016, when it aired "Thundermans: Secret Revealed," advertised as a special, even though people were saying that was the season three finale, and same kind of deal with Girl Meets World. Nickelodeon and Disney Channel always have breaks of at least two or three months, give or take, between season finales and season premieres. So... thoughts? Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:01, 23 March 2017 (UTC) Seeing that the "special" is a recap of what happened in the first five episodes, from how it's described, I'd be inclined to keep it in the season one set. MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:44, 23 March 2017 (UTC) Actually, that's exactly why it should be kept out of season #1 and put in its own section – it's not a regular (scripted) "episode" but a "recap special". Again, the Once Upon a Time example is 100% relevant in this case. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:21, 23 March 2017 (UTC) Amaury, the big difference between this one and your examples are that this one was an unscripted "recap" special, that has the word "Special" right there in the title, while your other examples are all scripted episodes that were simply advertised as "specials" by Nick for promotional purposes. IOW, all the others are actually (scripted) episodes of those series, while the Hunter Street special was not. As you say, the production code thing is probably relevant here – even the closest other examples you can think of, e.g. ""#BlooperEpisode" for Sam & Cat or "Blooptorious" for Victorious or ""iBloop" for iCarly, all had regular production codes, whereas the Hunter Street recap doesn't. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:21, 23 March 2017 (UTC) @IJBall: Then it gets more tricky because you have things like The Thundermans' "Thundermans: Secret Revealed" and Girl Meets World's "Girl Meets What the What/Demolition" being classified as specials by the networks and also having their own "special" section in the article, unlike other episodes, such as The Thundermans' "Thundermans: Banished!" Henry Danger's "Hour of Power," and Nicky, Ricky, Dicky & Dawn's "Go Hollywood" also being classified as specials, I think—I don't remember—and still being in the season tables. However, I think we can go ahead and do this now, we just won't split the article until there's a second season if it's renewed. I'd still like to see if Geraldo Perez and Nyuszika7H have any feedback and if MPFitz1968 has any further feedback, but you've convinced me, IJBall. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:40, 24 March 2017 (UTC) "Girl Meets Demolition" seems to be a really weird case, where Disney aired an episode "between seasons" and called it a "special". IIRC, there's actually sourcing support for doing that, so it's probably best to leave that one as it is. (However, "World Meets Girl" is a whole separate special case, that I think should be pulled out of season #3, and put its own section (though not necessarily in the 'Series overview' table), for all the same reasons as the "Hunter Street" special...) The others all look to me to be "regular" (often 1-hour) episodes that were simply advertised as "special episodes" by their networks. I dunno enough about "Thundermans: Secret Revealed" to comment on that one... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:52, 24 March 2017 (UTC) BTW, found another example – List of Nashville (2012 TV series) episodes#Specials. Basically, "recap" episodes and "behind the scenes" episodes are not "regular" episodes in terms of scripted TV series, and should be pulled out of the list of "season X" episodes tables, and just put(/dumped!) into a separate "Specials" section. I'll try to get to doing that for "World Meets Girl" over the weekend... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:14, 24 March 2017 (UTC) @IJBall: Hm. World Meets Girl actually has a season three production code of 321 (the 60 just indicates it's an hour), so it's actually very likely part of season three and filmed as such as we did have sources stating 21 episodes for the third season. It's even in Screener as season three. Now, that is the same case with Girl Meets What the What/Demolition being in there as season one episode 21, but Girl Meets What the What/Demolition has sources, including Disney Channel itself, calling it a special, whereas that's not the case with World Meets Girl, so I think that one is fine as is, IMO. Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:23, 24 March 2017 (UTC) The counterpoint is something like this, a source which uses the word "special" in referring to it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:33, 24 March 2017 (UTC) @IJBall: That seems to cause even more confusion and put us back to square one. LOL, what a mess, amirite?! Using that thinking, then what about episodes like those aforementioned episodes or even Henry Danger's Danger & Thunder or The Thundermans' The Haunted Hathaways and the like? Should they then also be taken out of their respective seasons and placed under a specials section? Although those have "special" production codes, so instead what about the two-parters such as Space Invaders which are advertised as specials and have "normal" production codes like Girl Meets World's World Meets Girl? Should they be in the specials section? Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:55, 24 March 2017 (UTC) My argument is that those stay where they are, because they're "regular" (i.e. scripted) episodes of those series. "Girl Meets Demolition" (and maybe "Thundermans: Secret Revealed") seem like really special (oddball) cases. But, most of the time, I say we should ignore when Nick (or Disney) advertise scripted episodes as "specials" (esp. if other WP:RS ignore the designation) because usually it doesn't mean anything (at most, it may mean that it's a 1-hour episode instead of a 30-minute "regular" episode). What I'm saying is that only "unscripted" episodes of scripted series – e.g. recap specials, behind-the-scenes specials, and in the case of Nashville concert specials – should be pulled out of the regular episodes list, and put into a separate "Specials" subsection, like the three examples I've provided above do. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:02, 24 March 2017 (UTC) @IJBall: Even if they have regular production codes? Because with special production codes, such as 999/999-60, I could easily see it, but when you have regular productions on said episodes—in this case, 321 for World Meets Girl—it seems to me that they were clearly filmed to be part of that season as otherwise they would have had a special production code. I mean, that argument could also be said for episodes like Girl Meets What the What/Demolition and Girl Meets Fish, the former having a season two production code, but airing as a special for Disney Channel's What the What event, and the latter having a season one production code, clearly shown by the opening sequence, but airing as part of season two. There was an a pretty identical situation with Liv and Maddie, where SPARF-a-Rooney (303) aired as S2 E23 and Grandma-a-Rooney (218) aired as S3 E6. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:14, 24 March 2017 (UTC) "Out of season" order episodes, like "Girl Meets Fish", are not at all unusual in the world of television series – just today it was announced that FOX was going to hold back 4–5 "season #2" episodes of Lucifer and air them with "season #3" this fall. Game Shakers also did that. (An extreme case was Saved by the Bell which aired a couple of episodes about 3 seasons out-of-order and late!) So that doesn't qualify you as a "special episode". Basically, I think you qualify for the "special" line in a series overview table if either, 1) WP:RS make note of it, or 2) there's a press release from the airing network indicating the "special" status. I think "Girl Meets Demolition" qualifies under the second one. But unscripted episodes of scripted TV series are a whole different animal. And, note – I'm not saying that we don't still "count" these as episodes (e.g. in terms of the total number of episodes of a series); I'm just saying that should be put in a different section to note that they aren't "regular" (scripted) episodes of the series. That also doesn't mean that we can't add prose to note all this – e.g. "Near the end of season 3, Disney Channel aired a behind-the-scenes special episode[source]..." Etc. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:28, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Tangled: Before Ever After

Say, you wouldn't happen to have the ratings for this from one of your sources, would you? (That info needs to be added to List of Disney Channel original films...) Thanks in advance! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:43, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: Looks like whoever added it to Tangled: The Series forgot to add it there: [6] Archived 2017-12-08 at the Wayback Machine Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:51, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

OK, will try to add that to Tangled Ever After and List of Disney Channel original films in the next 12–24 hours... Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:54, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

IP 176.204.25.217

Do not use that tool again to revert anything other than vandalism, please. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 07:50, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Reverting socks is a clear exception to use it. Other administrators, users, and myself have been dealing with this user since October, so please don't come barging in here like that when you don't know the complete history. Thanks. Amaury (talk | contribs) 07:55, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm not trying to barge in here... I just wanted to re-impress upon you the fact that you should have used the Twinkle rollback feature in this case with an explanation. I of course wouldn't expect you to do so if they were editing a few dozen times a minute, but they weren't. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 08:02, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

@Coffee: Thank you for clarifying your intentions. That extra clarification would have helped in your last message, but that's in the past now. Please enjoy your night, and I do mean that. Amaury (talk | contribs) 08:06, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

I have a habit of coming off as too harsh inadvertently (perhaps from my blunt style). You're a great editor here, and I've always known you to be a reasonable person. So I definitely don't want you to take my warning above as anything other than advice, albeit firmly worded (that's, like I said, kinda my style in these [some might even argue most] matters). — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 08:20, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Best Friends Whenever

I put that on the template because Disney Channel cancelled Best Friends Whenever after December 2016. It's true that it got cancelled because I saw it on the main article for the show. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caleb Doerksen (talk • contribs) 16:02, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

@Caleb Doerksen: It's true that we have some sources showing tweets and Tumblr posts from cast members saying so, but they cannot speak for the series. Only Disney Channel or the showrunner can and there have been no official announcements from either of them. As such, we can mention what the cast members have said, but we can't actually tag the series as over until there's either an official announcement or it has been one year since the last new episode, in which we automatically assume it's canceled. Until that point, anything could change and anything's possible. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:22, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

List of Disney Channel series

Amaury, from now on when you revert changes to either BFW or Lab Rats: Elite Force at either List of Disney Channel series or Template:Disney Channel Original Series, I'd route editors to the discussion at Talk:List of Disney Channel series#Semi-protected edit request on 25 March 2017 in the edit summary – that will make everyone aware of the exact issues involved, and hopefully will save us from any potential edit-warring. FWIW... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:27, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Certainly has been a mess in recent weeks regarding the status of BFW, and yet another IP effectively has requested that BFW be moved to the "Repeats of ended series" in the article List of programs broadcast by Disney Channel, at that article's talk page. I think I've given a firm response to the request, also referring everyone else making such a request to the talk page entry you mentioned above, IJBall. MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:02, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

(Just noticed at Talk:List of programs broadcast by Disney Channel that the IP who made the request made the same request on March 15 over there, but apparently didn't get it the first time.) MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:12, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Gabrielle Elyse

Gabrielle Elyse was in the main cast for every episode of Nicky, Ricky, Dicky, & Dawn she appeared in. You can watch the openings of any episode she appeared in to confirm this. Please do not revert valid edits. 97.88.40.3 (talk) 15:46, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

@97.88.40.3: As of season two, she is no longer a main character. In the same vein that we move recurring characters who are promoted to series regular in a later season to main characters—for example, Principal Mullins in School of Rock—we also remove characters from main characters if they are no longer main. I'll invite Geraldo Perez, MPFitz1968, and IJBall for further feedback just in case there's a slight chance I may be wrong here. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:57, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

It doesn't matter she's no longer a main character. That's a rule you made up. Per T:ITV: "The show's star or stars...Cast are listed in original credit order followed by order in which new cast joined the show. Years and/or seasons should not be included." It says nothing about current cast only and strongly implies all cast over the course of the entire series. This is spelled out at WP:TVCAST, which says, "The cast listing should be ordered according to the original broadcast credits, with new cast members being added to the end of the list. Articles should reflect the entire history of a series, and as such actors remain on the list even after their departure from the series." 97.88.40.3 (talk) 16:07, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

You need to be civil and not accuse others of things if you want this discussion to go anywhere. Also, for reference, they also started this discussion over on Talk:Nicky, Ricky, Dicky & Dawn#Gabrielle Elyse, but it must stay in one place. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:08, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

If you want to pull the civil card, we can take it to Wikipedia's admins, especially after I just quoted multiple policies to you, and your response was "...for further feedback just in case there's a slight chance I may be wrong here," which sounds pretty condescending to me. You're wrong. I've been editing television articles on Wikipedia for nearly a decade. The fact I'm behind an ip doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about. 97.88.40.3 (talk) 16:11, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Regardless of who's right or wrong, per WP:BRD, the onus is on you to discuss. You were bold; I challenged it; now you discuss. Threatening to report me to the administrators for taking the proper procedures is rather silly as is claiming I was being condescending when I wasn't. Lose the attitude and discuss constructively. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:20, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

And I did discuss, even before you reverted me the second time. I've quoted multiple policies. You haven't quoted a single one. One other person on the talk page even disagrees with you. You're the one who brought civility into this after you seemed to imply I didn't know what I was talking about. Take your own advice and I'll follow suit. 97.88.40.3 (talk) 16:23, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Again, it doesn't matter who's right or wrong. WP:BRD procedures must still be followed, and it was wrong of you to revert me. GP is a colleague of mine here and so I requested his feedback (as well as others' feedback). And for the record, I don't care if people disagree with me, what I care about is when they get unnecessarily "combative" with me, so to speak. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:27, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Did I say it matters who's right or wrong? You implied I've not been trying to discuss. I did. If quoting policies isn't discussion, I don't know what is. I said a single thing out of frustration after you implied I don't know what I'm talking about, and then implied you're just not going to listen to me if I don't live up to your standards of civility. No, it's probably not the most constructive thing I've ever said, but you should probably reflect on your own behavior as well. It's such frustration that keeps some ips like me from becoming more involved in the project. Yes, civility's a great thing, but it shouldn't be used to ignore arguments. 97.88.40.3 (talk) 16:33, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

When you reverted me and failed to follow WP:BRD procedures. It's bold, revert, discuss, not bold, revert, create a discussion, revert again pointing to said discussion. If you're going to come in here and be combative, of course I'm going to "defend" myself per se. If you want to call that a behavioral issue, by all means. Regardless, the issue is resolved now, so just drop the stick and let it go. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:42, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

User Orchomen

Hey Amaury. I was wondering if you thought it was time we start categorizing Orchomen's sockpuppets by year? It's getting a little crowded and looks confusing. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 02:23, 1 April 2017 (UTC)