User talk:BornonJune8/Archive1

October 2010

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Category:Arcade and video games based on Batman films, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. Categories must also be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Thank you. -5- (talk) 12:23, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

October 2010

I'm just trying to maintain the templates. Those have never been linked like that before on those templates. It seems really unnecessary. I may get a second opinion on whether those are needed or not.-5- (talk) 19:52, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which TV/movie templates are you referring to?-5- (talk) 19:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I thought you meant that other TV/movie templates do the same thing.-5- (talk) 20:00, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked an admin for a second opinion.-5- (talk) 20:43, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And as to that third opinion: Piping is unnecessarily, undermine an aspect of the navbox coding, and potentially problematic.

The base coding for navboxes takes links and converts them to bold unlinked text when the 'box shows on that particular page. Using piping voids this process and leave a recursive link in the 'box - something that is not desirable.
At least two of the templates involved use the phrase "adapted". Pointing to the hope article in those cases is more than reasonable. Also some of the "narrowed" sections provide little or no content aside from an actor's name.
Section titles can, and do change from time to time. This can make the pipes useless very quickly and tricky to update.

- J Greb (talk) 22:03, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links

You appear to be relatively new. External links are here to link to official website(s) only - and usually only their main website. You shouldn't be adding external links to google search results. The reader is expected to be able to search google on their own.

I spot checked another edit in The USA Thursday Game of the Week. You don't edit the references section by adding HTML. You just use the {{reflist}}. You shouldn't be using any HTML except < ref >. Please ask if you have questions. Royal broil 00:30, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blogs as reference sources

Hello... first off, thanks for the contributions; you've been doing a lot of useful cleanup for the site. Unfortunately, I've had to revert a recent series of edits that you made to Batman-related articles, as we cannot use a blog as a reference source (nor would we typically link to it). Please feel free to ask if you have any questions about this, and thanks again. --Ckatz^chat _spy

February 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia, as you did in Miami Vice, makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Srobak (talk) 07:11, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:The CW Television Network

A tag has been placed on Template:The CW Television Network requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. TheRealFennShysa (talk) 15:41, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring on Template:The CW Television Network

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:The CW Television Network. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. MikeWazowski (talk) 04:17, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Season Finale: The Unexpected Rise and Fall of The WB and UPN. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. MikeWazowski (talk) 04:20, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You've been reported for edit warring

Please see WP:AN3#User:BornonJune8 reported by User:MikeWazowski (Result: ). You may respond there if you wish. Since you've clearly broken WP:3RR, you may be blocked unless you promise to wait for consensus regarding the content and usage of Template:The CW Television Network. EdJohnston (talk) 05:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Result of the 3RR complaint

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

The report of this case is at WP:AN3#User:BornonJune8 reported by User:MikeWazowski (Result: 31h). In your own response at the noticeboard, you simply asserted that you were correct and you did not agree to wait for consensus in the future, which would have been the sensible thing. EdJohnston (talk) 05:44, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of albums considered the worst for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of albums considered the worst is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of albums considered the worst until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Rd232 ^talk 23:33, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of ESPN Major League Soccer personalities

The article List of ESPN Major League Soccer personalities has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Basically a copy and paste from ESPN Major League Soccer, which has all of this information already

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Theking17825 (talk) 21:52, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, I didn't realize that you had edited the ESPN Major League Soccer page as well. I removed the proposed deletion tag :) Theking17825 (talk) 22:03, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NHL postseason by team categories

I have nominated all for mergers into other categories. Please see the discussion here. Thanks, Reso lute 01:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: TBN

Please read this, either that or you'd need a reliable source stating that the music was indeed "bombastic". And for the logo description, I'd actually rather us try and find an image of the actual logo or title card or something, cause we can do that.ViperSnake151 Talk 21:41, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brokered programming category

I have removed many of the sports programs you have added under this category. The term more appropriate for these programs would be a 'time-buy', which is a completely different concept where a sister network or other promotion sells time to another operation to put on their event. Brokered programming is some person buying time at 2am Saturday mornings to show a low-quality talent show on a local television station, and it is definitely more a radio term than one applied to television. Nate • (chatter) 06:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:National Basketball Association postseason by team

Category:National Basketball Association postseason by team, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Bagumba (talk) 22:07, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

September 2011

Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Beetlejuice (TV series) worked, and it has been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ridernyc (talk) 21:54, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]