Jump to content

User talk:Brocicle/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

RuPaul's Drag Race All Stars (season 3)

Hi there, would you agree to keep Shangela and Thorgy as 'SAFE' - with the cornsilk tint - for now as both of them received positive and negative critiques in the premiere episode? Seeing as the first two seasons have the cornsilk 'SAFE' to keep generalized, I thought it would be right to carry it on in this season, especially seeing as both contestants were given good and bad feedback. Please let me know your opinion on the situation, thank you. MSMRHurricane (talk) 08:01, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

@MSMRHurricane:Yes I do agree that's the best option. Considering they were told to be SAFE at the same time its more accurate that way. Although there are many sources that puts Thorgy LOW and Shangela HIGH :/ Brocicle (talk) 11:05, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Yes, the other user did mention there were sources that said this, but I told them that they haven't provided any sources, therefore the edits should be reverted until said sources are provided. I think we should leave it as 'SAFE' with the cornsilk tint though, to be in-keeping with seasons 1 and 2 of all stars. MSMRHurricane (talk) 03:21, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
@MSMRHurricane:Absolutely agree. Brocicle (talk) 05:02, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm glad to hear that. :) As for this episode, I think it's right to have 'HIGH' and 'LOW' for BeBe and ChiChi, as Ru did declare that each were in the top 3 and bottom 3 of the week. However, I think I might add the cornsilk in to keep it general for the first episode, seeing as Shangela and Thorgy did receive positive and negative critiques. Thoughts? MSMRHurricane (talk) 07:30, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
@MSMRHurricane: As they were explicitly stated to be in the top 3 or the bottom three the high and low should be fine. Brocicle (talk) 08:03, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Seeing as I do not want to engage in an edit war, would you agree that the new link provided to justify Shangela and Thorgy being 'HIGH' in the fist episode is totally opinionated? As if it's just the writers own view instead of taking into account the entire critique both of the queens were given? Let me know if I should bring this up in the public talk page to discuss, seeing as I find it rather biased. Thanks! MSMRHurricane (talk) 08:55, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

@MSMRHurricane:Yes, there are also sources stating thorgy as low not high. There is a discussion already open on thorgy's placement but it hasn't really gone anywhere. Brocicle (talk) 09:48, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Exactly, hence why we should keep the first episode the general cornsilk 'SAFE'. MSMRHurricane (talk) 20:03, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Assistance

Hi there, I was just wondering if you would assist me - or at least give your own opinion - on the Gotham character table. An editor has claimed they are adjusting the table to be consistent with the other superhero shows, yet Gotham isn't really considered a superhero television show - so that reasoning is rather redundant - and their reason for changing recurring characters to 4+ episodes is ridiculous - once again, it's consistent with the other superhero TV shows, yet that is not a reason. Even though for recurring characters, rules have not been made, but it's reasonable to have 3+ episodes for the character to be considered recurring, seeing as I was told this way by other established editors. If you wouldn't mind giving your own opinions though, that would be great. Thanks! MSMRHurricane (talk) 18:52, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

@MSMRHurricane:Has there been a discussion on the talk page that has formed a general consensus? If so editors must abide by that or open a new discussion. If not I definitely suggest beginning one and asking regular contributors to the article for their opinion. I will happily give a third opinion from an outside perspective if necessary. Brocicle (talk) 19:22, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, that would be a good step to take. However, looking at a previous discussion, I would assume most of the editors will keep the changes seeing as the show would fit within the "superhero/comic book" universe... I would find my efforts pointless. However, if you do feel the table was fine before, by all means please contribute your own opinions and I will fully back you up. I've had an issue years ago with the style of these character tables as I found the "first appearance" section being redundant and the edits are not accurate, as cast members were not being labeled as what they were rightfully credited as (i.e. guest instead of special guest). I'm trying to find the wiki rules on character tables as I swear the last time I read it the rules stated information such as "first appearance" was not allowed, or something along those lines... MSMRHurricane (talk) 06:22, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
@MSMRHurricane: Sorry for the late response, I meant to reply yesterday but got distracted then forgot to! Honestly I think your best bet is to go on over to the talk page on MOS:TV and ask for some clarification. I had a quick look through the page and it doesn't really sat anything about the issue you're experiencing so may be they'll be able to give you some advice on how it should be structured. :) Brocicle (talk) 06:50, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Recent updates

Hi again, I seem to always hit you up when I run into some sort of conflict, my apologies. However, I wanted to get your opinion specifically on Morgan McMichael's re-entrance into the competition for All Stars. I vote for having "IN" on the table, as its simplistic and it is in keeping with these kinds of tables (Project Runway). Another user suggests "RTRN" instead, which I personally finds that it looks ridiculous in the table, as it even took me a moment to figure out what it was short for (return, duh!) but I still think it doesn't fit. What are your thoughts? MSMRHurricane (talk) 01:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I had previously changed it to "IN" but the same user changed it back. I agree IN is much more simplistic and straight to the point. Brocicle (talk) 07:22, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
Shall we address this in the public talk page? MSMRHurricane (talk) 09:06, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
Wouldnt be a bad idea considering its the same user changing it back. Brocicle (talk) 09:13, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
How about you get it started and I'll throw my support in? MSMRHurricane (talk) 18:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Rupaul's Drag Race

I was not changing it based on personal preference, I was unifying the background colours to be all the same.

Lavince14 (talk) 13:05, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

"Personally I think the default looks better than cornsilk".
They're different colours for a reason. Leave it alone. Brocicle (talk) 13:08, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Why are there different colours for the exact same thing within the same table though, with no distinction in the legend? This is what I was fixing. On Season 10's page, episode 1 has #f9f9f9 for SAFE cells, but episode 2 has cornsilk. I was making them all the same colour. Lavince14 (talk) 13:15, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
There is a distinction in the legend...it literally says "The contestant received judges critiques but was ultimately chosen to be safe". The ones that say SAFE without the cornsilk are those who are declared safe and don't receive critiques. This doesn't need a box in the legend because it's implied by those labled differently. Brocicle (talk) 13:20, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
I literally just noticed today that there were cells that used cornsilk. If there had been a box in the legend for queens who didn't get critiques I wouldn't have thought there was a mistake with the background colours. I didn't even know that if a queen did or didn't receive critiques was something being tracked in the first place. The verbiage for legend descriptions on being SAFE still need to be unified across the board for all seasons, and prior seasons don't all have the legend entries for positive and negative critiques (some are missing one or the other or both). Also you forgot to undo my edits for season 8. Lavince14 (talk) 13:36, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
There is no need for one to be added for the queens who didn't receive critiques. You can tell who did and didn't receive them by whats in the table already. I'm done with this conversation because I'm just repeating myself now. Brocicle (talk) 13:45, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Season 3's page is missing the legend entry for if the contestant received negative critiques but was declared safe. This is the case for most of the earlier seasons. Also the exact verbiage varies on each of the different pages. I would make these changes but I don't want to put in the effort because I feel like you will just revert my edits anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lavince14 (talk • contribs) 13:48, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
But those edits are actually constructive and help the page so I wouldn't revert you but okay then. Brocicle (talk) 13:50, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
But you reverted them earlier to revert my original edit that removed cornsilk, and then didn't mention anything about redoing the changes I made in the second edit. Lavince14 (talk) 13:53, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Redone them. This can end now. Brocicle (talk) 13:57, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Can you also copy the same text to Season 9's page? I can't edit it and there are random quotation marks on safe, and one of the legend entries says "was chosen to be safe" instead of "was ultimately declared safe" Lavince14 (talk) 14:04, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

The Switch Drag Race

I know that you are keeping an eye on my article for The Switch Drag Race and I appreciate your revision of a certain user’s attempts to vandalize the page.

I wanted to reach out as I live in NYC and don’t have proper access to watch The Switch Season 2 beyond the first episode (that was uploaded to their YouTube account) so I won’t be able to make any edits in regard to the progress table for Season 2 until I have aforementioned access. If you have access to the show, I would appreciate it if you could keep the chart updated, or if not, simply continue assisting in undoing the wrongful edits of the page as a whole.

If you do have access: ideally, I would like to keep the table on an individual episode basis and not join episodes 1 and 2 together, for example, as it reads very confusing to newcomers to the show. I recently changed Season 1’s chart to reflect individual episodes and it makes much more sense visually.

In sum, just wanted to give you a heads up and thank you for watching and correcting the article as necessary. ~~ 

cmilette (talk) 02:19, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
@Cmilette: I live in Australia so don't have much access to the show either right away but I'll see what I can do with news articles etc. But I do agree that episode 1 and 2 should be separate not joined. I'll work something out as the season progresses! Brocicle (talk) 16:11, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
@Cmilette: I've updated the contestant progress table as best as I could. Let me know what you think and if there are some aspects that need sourcing or if anything should be added to the table such as colours to the contestant name to represent their respective team and other things like that. Brocicle (talk) 17:03, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello! Someone has just copied the information from my page and created two new Wikipedia pages (one for each season of The Switch). Due to the lack of references in English, I’m not sure that both seasons warrant their own Wikipedia page. What do you think should be done? Cmilette —Preceding undated comment added 11:35, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

I have decided to tag both pages for speedy deletion with reference to the original article’s existence. Btw I have been able to find the episodes and adjusted the chart yesterday. I’ll continue to do so in the future. Also, just a heads up that I believe this season will be 36 episodes in length this time around. Cmilette —Preceding undated comment added 12:19, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

@Cmilette:I agree that deletion is the best way to go. May be if they're renewed for a third season we can consider splitting the article then but for now it's good the way it is. Brocicle (talk) 14:16, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

Rather than harass you with thank you notifications, I am here to thank you for A Quiet Place. I suck at arguing and so I decided to give up. If you need my help, I'm here (: Callmemirela 🍁 talk 02:21, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

@Callmemirela: Not a problem, there is also a discussion about it over on the talk page for MOS:FILM if you wanted to have a look at that. I'm considering opening a dispute resolution based on WP:OWN considering the editor has reverted every attempt by more than 10 editors in the last month alone. Brocicle (talk) 05:59, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Drag Race Deadnames

Why are you keeping the deadnames of trans contestants on the Drag Race pages? Wikipedia is not a catchall for all information, the fact that those were their names at the time of the show airing isn't relevant, as they weren't called those names on the show. Had they changed their drag name, that would be relevant. This isn't just trivia, it's transphobic. Weelilbit (talk) 12:45, 29 June 2018 (UTC) ETA: You may want to educate yourself on the violence of keeping deadnames 'alive' on Wikipedia. This is a personal sort of slur that just doesn't merit any usage.[1][2]

It is not transphobic. As you can see with Sonique there is a note stating she legally changed her name to reflect her gender transition. The others havent been added because no reliable source has been provided. If you have an actual reliable source then feel free to add it As this was the consensus agreed upon. Caitlyn Jenner's gold medal wins [3] are listed under her "dead name", this is no different. Brocicle (talk) 12:52, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Oh and just to add, Some contestants introduced themselves with their legal names at the time so they were mentioned on the show. Brocicle (talk) 13:03, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Are you transgender? If not, you cannot declare what is and is not transphobic. That's not how that works. Same as I, a white person, am not the arbiter of what is and isn't racist. If you'd actually put your ego in your pocket, you'd see that I'd added references to the name changes where found. None of the names were thrown on there willy-nilly, I've got some brains in my head, thank you. And if I introduce myself to you as Billy as a child and then later, William, do you insist on calling me Billy for all eternity? No, you don't, because you're not a jerk. You respect someone. That's what these name changes reflect, respect. Additionally, Caitlyn Jenner's accolades should be listed under her name because it's her NAME. Yes, she was going by a different name then, but it's far more personal than something like changing one's name after marriage. Check yourself. Weelilbit (talk) 11:31, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Like I said, you're more than welcome to add their current legal name as a note like Sonique's is presented in season 2 with a valid source, IMDB is not considered a reliable source on wikipedia. Caitlyn's winnings shouldnt be listed as that was not her name when she won, nor would it be the name listed under official Olympic records. Please see MOS:GENDERID for further information, most specifically "The MoS does not specify when and how to present former names, or whether to use the former or present name first." Please take your SJW elsewhere, consensus has been agreed upon but you're free to open a discussion elsewhere. Brocicle (talk) 18:15, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

RPDR Season summary table

Brocicle,

I have reverted your change on the table previously (when you added the scrolling mechanism) because the table itself has been designed to display information all at once and fit the page even when zooming in or out. That being said, I didn't understand what you meant by the table breaking the page, or something close to that, and then we can reach to a solution. Thank you!

k_cms (talk) 17:42, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

@K CMS:I think you have the wrong article or user because there isnt a scrolling mechanism on the season summary table for RPDR. Brocicle (talk) 18:46, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

TonyBallioni (talk) 14:20, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Title card for Dancing Queen.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 22:35, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Creation of a Monique Heart Wikipedia Page

Hello! I wanted to inquire to you if you would be interested in participating in the creation of a Wikipedia article for Monique Heart considering that she was announced for All Stars Season 4. Theneondemon (talk) 23:59, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

@Theneondemon: Sorry for the late response, I am interested in participating thank you. :) I think Another Believer may have already started an article/draft article but not 100% certain. Brocicle (talk) 09:39, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
@Theneondemon: I have not stared one yet, but by all means, please expand Monique Heart and I'll keep an eye on the page! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:36, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
@Theneondemon: @Another Believer:. I have started the article over on my sandbox here [4], as the article already exists as a redirect so to prevent this we should have info and sources all ready to go before changing the redirect to the article itself. This will minimise potential for article deletion or again a redirect. Please feel free to edit as you see fit and if the guidelines for BLP are met publish it on her article page and remove the redirect, I currently dont have much time to contribute at the moment unfortunately. Please notify other users who may wish to contribute as well, as I don't mind sharing my sandbox for this collaborative purpose. :) Brocicle (talk) 16:43, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
@Dallasansel:Think you might be interested. Brocicle (talk) 16:47, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Of course, I’ll see what I can find! Dallasansel (talk) 21:02, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
@Dallasansel: @Theneondemon: @Another Believer: Have any of you been able to find a secondary source for Monique's birth date? I can't seem to find any. Brocicle (talk) 14:01, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Edit warring

As predicted, you have continued to edit war in the middle of a discussion. Please undo your edit here and reread and familiarize yourself with WP:BRD. If you need help in understanding it then feel free to ask any questions. Nihlus 08:49, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Excuse me? I restored it to what YOU added until the discussion was finished which is what is supposed to be done. And if you're talking about removing the Holi-slay placement it constitutes WP:CRYSTAL to assume elimination style/placements if there even is to be any because we do not know. This continued targeted harassment by you is getting ridiculous. Any more wrong accusations by you I will be seeking admin intervention, as you seemingly have a personal and biased grudge against me.
Brocicle (talk) 09:17, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm harassing no one and and any retaliatory threats made by you will be ignored. However, I did mix up the edits as I thought your edit was this one. So I do apologize for that; that is my mistake. Nihlus 09:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the apology. Brocicle (talk) 09:29, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Brocicle. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Rupaul's drag race season 10

Aquaria placed high episode 9 and Eureka was just safe episode 11 so I'm not sure why you keep changing these things? let me know thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradleysbatesmotelx (talk • contribs) 08:00, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Because that's your personal opinion on the critiques. All critiques are sourced and should be reflected. Not sure why you continue to change after multiple editors have reverted and explained why. Brocicle (talk) 08:23, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
In case you can't be bothered reading the source provided  Aquaria is given a hard time for her runway not looking “old” or “in her 70s” enough. That is a negative critique. Brocicle (talk) 08:29, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Incase you aren't aware Monet also was given a hard time for her runway and its still left as "high" because she and aquaria were in the top with asia winning the challenge not sure why the double standards since the show doesn't directly make the distinction for "high" and "safe" anyway — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradleysbatesmotelx (talk • contribs) 18:38, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Read the source and you'll see why Monet is classed as HIGH. Thanks. Brocicle (talk) 20:03, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
There was also an entire discussion here about the use of HIGH/SAFE/LOW which you may be interested in reading. You should also read WP:NPOV and WP:OR to help further understand why you need to stop changing sourced information over and over after being asked not to and why not to, to your own personal preference and interpretation of the critiques. Thanks. Brocicle (talk) 20:23, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Brocicle/Archive_4&oldid=1140729375"