User talk:Geraldo Perez/Archive 8

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Geraldo Perez. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Elsa (Disney)

How is my edit vandalism? I watched the movie plenty of times. Do you have another way of saying formerly? She was a princess but she became a queen on her coronation. Obviously her father was the ruler at the beginning but he died. And of course as the eldest daughter and princess, she's next in line for the throne. Think of it as real life royalty. Even at the beginning of Elsa's page it says that she's the heir to the throne. Have you read that? Looks like you're the one who hasn't watched the movie. Everyone complains how she's not a princess, but she's a queen. Have you also read that? I also don't know if you collect the Limited Edition Elsa dolls, but she's also mentioned as princess on the CoAs but she's not a princess and everyone knows that. But that's how Disney writes them. Even in the French and Spanish Wiki pages of Elsa mentions that she was formerly a princess in the box. Why can't we mention that?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirrorthesoul (talk • contribs) 03:29, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

@Mirrorthesoul: You are adding false info and are persisting. I saw the movie. Before the coronation scene she is a princess, after the coronation scene she is a queen. Therefore in the movie itself she is shown to be both. Fiction is described in a continuous present tense and comes alive while being watched. See WP:FICTENSE. There is no "formerly". Descriptions are for the whole movie, not just the state shown in the last seconds of it. These are works of fiction, this is not real life. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:43, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

How is it false info when it's the truth? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirrorthesoul (talk • contribs) 03:46, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

@Mirrorthesoul: As I stated above and explained. Stating she is a former princess is false for the part of the movie before the coronation. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:50, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

So what's the right word, previously? Is that okay to mention or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirrorthesoul (talk • contribs) 03:51, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

@Mirrorthesoul: The right way is as it was without the parenthetical, she had two titles in the movie, list them both as was shown to be both in the movie itself. Movies come alive while being watched. Present is the current point in the movie for a viewer who is watching it. If you were to use parentheticals formerly would have to be replace with Princess (before her father's death), Queen (after her father's death). Best to just leave that out as the text of the article does make that clear and that is also fairly obvious as to how and when a heir inherits. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:04, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Actually it is a bit ambiguous as to what she was between her father's death and the coronation scene. In most European royalty she would become queen on the death of her father but can't rule on her own without a regent until of age. They never made clear how it worked in Frozen. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Game Shakers on Amazon

That's peculiar. Their air dates for the show are off starting with the sixth episode: Scared Tripless, which aired on October 24, 2015. They're showing as a day earlier than when they actually aired. Those are Fridays, not Saturdays. Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:52, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Possibly Amazon got it early but it is strange. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:54, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

If anyone cares, I've also noticed that airing dates (what they call "publication dates") listed for TV episodes at the U.S. Copyright Office are also often off by somewhere between a day to a week (pilot episodes, esp., often seem to have "publication dates" up to a week before their actual airing date). Dunno why this is... Unfortunately, solid sourcing for airdates are hard to come by (unless you happen to have old editions of TV Guide lying around...). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:32, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: They're hard to come by, but they do exist. The Futon Critic is an excellent solid source, with Zap2it being a close second as they're generally okay most of the time. Amaury (talk | contribs) 04:36, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Well, I was thinking about older, esp. pre-2000s shows. (You know, it's a shame – Futon Critic's website has actually existed since the late 90s, IIRC, but it looks like all of their pre-2005(roughly) archives have been wiped, so you can't find Futon's late-90s or early-2000s stuff anymore. But even Futon would be useless if you're looking for airdates and info for shows from the 50s through the 90s and the early 2000s...

--IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:43, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Status Update

I'm about to go to bed, so it won't be me, but this seems to confirm most of the rest of cast for Status Update, if anyone wants to use it source the cast additions... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:52, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: Looks interesting. Is this a DCOM? Amaury (talk | contribs) 06:02, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: I don't think so – it looks like it's going to be a theatrically released film. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:23, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Songs

@Geraldo Perez: Thanks for your note re the various IPs, you have hit it exactly right I think! Since the one is blocked, I'll keep an eye out for the other, plus will watch a few articles like Howard Ashman and Zeus and Roxanne. Flami72 (talk) 19:54, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Me logged out on T-Mobile

Just to note my cell data IP address. 2607:FB90:1D13:CCE3:CC1B:705E:D4E0:38F0 (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes it was me. Geo locates to Detroit which is nowhere near where I actually am located. Hmmm? Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:24, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

IPv4 looks to be 172.56.11.82. For some reason Wikipedia connects using IPv6. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:17, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

My cell data IP address today is 172.56.20.60 and 2607:FB90:99E:81C9:68DF:6936:146:9D9D (talk) 16:49, 29 August 2016 (UTC) Which geo locates to T-Mobile Atlanta, again nowhere near where I actually am right now. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:54, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Query: So, is this exercise to show that "SPI hunting for socks" is basically impossible if they're using a mobile phone to edit?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:14, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: Pretty much. I was also just curious about how things work. One semi-disruptive IP I watch uses the 2607:FB90::/32 range and I was a bit distressed I did too. Basically it looks like every time I connect using cellular data I get a different IP. Also annoying that Wikipedia connects using IPv6 instead of the parallel IPv4 they could be using. Ready for the future I guess. Most of our tools work best on IPv4 addresses and that Wikipedia choice makes vandal tracking and blocking much more difficult. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

For IPv6, users should usually get one /64, but apparently that's not the case with all carriers then. I don't have IPv6 here, but the IPv4 address of my home and mobile connections don't even stay within the same /8. Also, geolocation services can be inaccurate, some show me in the capital, Budapest, which is like 100 kilometers away from here. Others show me in a nearby city, and some recognize my exact city. It also depends on the IP, not always the same. nyuszika7h (talk) 20:39, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

The /64 generally corresponds to the full IPv4 address and changes generally on disconnect and reconnect of connection to the ISP. My ADSL IPv4 only changes when I reboot my modem. My cell IPs seems to change each time I go between WiFi and cell data. My cell IPv4 geolocates to some lake in the middle of Kansas, the default if there is no real location. Used to go to someone's front yard but they changed it to the middle of a lake when lots of mad people kept showing up at his house for things some IP did (some illegal that got the law involved) that defaulted to the don't know lat long. My IPv6 should do the same but gives some actual cities instead. Geo location is part of vandal identification so good to know what can be depended on and not. The IPv6 database seems less complete than the much smaller IPv4 database. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:49, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Lucy Hale

Several IP users have been changing the year(s) she was involved on Pretty Little Liars from "2010-present" to "2010-2017", and I've needed to revert three such edits in the last few hours. They are obviously aware that PLL is ending (was announced recently that season 7 is their last), but I think it's premature to be changing this info right now in Lucy Hale's article per WP:CRYSTAL. I've just requested semi-protection, but it still might be good idea to watch this article. I'm getting a feeling this same type of edit is being done at the articles for other actors/actresses of the show, though I'm not watching any of those right now. MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:19, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

I'll watch this. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:26, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: Yeah, that's been driving me nuts – they've been doing that with The Vampire Diaries and Grimm (TV series)-related articles too. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

The Thundermans: Stealing Home

MPFitz1968, IJBall, Nyuszika7H

This has really been bugging me ever since I watched the episode on August 13. I can't figure out what Max says between the 20:05 and 20:15 marks, and the closed captioning doesn't help—you'd think they'd get an official script for each episode, but nope—because it just says (unintelligible). Just watch and listen from and until the times mentioned above and he'll say something about his dad's butt groove and then say "Nothing but (something)," (something) being what I can't tell he's saying. The typical saying is "nothing but net," but that is obviously not the case here, and he's using another word. I think it's just the way he says it that makes it hard to understand.

If you have a provider, like DirecTV, you can just sign in with your provider details, and watch it on the Nick site here. GP, I know you don't have a provider and if you want to watch something, you have to purchase from an online vendor like Amazon or iTunes, so I totally understand if you'd rather not purchase this episode just to answer an essentially silly question.

Thanks in advance! Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:26, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: The word I seem to hear (and I had headphones on while watching that part of the episode) sounds like gulk, and I found myself needing to look that one up. Appears not to be in standard dictionaries, but urbandictionary.com shows it as meaning "a 24-ounce beer can or 'tall boy'" [1]. Not sure about the reliability of that urban dictionary, nor its appropriateness in Wikipedia if a standard dictionary entry doesn't exist. There are two other definitions shown for the word, and neither of those (nor perhaps the one I quoted) is appropriate in the context of Nickelodeon (or Disney Channel) programming. MPFitz1968 (talk) 05:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: Yeah, I'm pretty sure I can make out at least a "G." At first I thought "goat," but that wouldn't make sense. The only other thing I can think of is "guilt," but I'm not totally sure. This reminds of a similar issue with Goofy in Kingdom Hearts and Kingdom Hearts II. I'm not sure if you've played those two games, but Goofy's battle cry when he's knocked out in those two games is "I've had it, fellers..." However, for the longest time, I couldn't figure out what he was saying and I eventually made a thread about it on KH-Vids, where we finally got that. To quote a fellow member: It's not so much the pronunciation, it's the way he says it; up and down, in a drawn out manner, but it's close together. I feel it's a similar case here with Max, as mentioned above. I'm interested in what the others can come up with when they have a chance and are able to. Perhaps they can even figure out what Max said, exactly.

PS: If you're interested in or curious about that discussion thread, you can read it here. Amaury (talk | contribs) 06:04, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: Urban Dictionary is WP:UGC therefore it would not be a reliable source for Wikipedia. Users can submit and vote on definitions, there are no "site-provided" definitions at all AFAIK. nyuszika7h (talk) 09:48, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Geraldo, Nyuszika7H, any input from you two? Already received input from Michael, and it sounds like IJBall can do it, but based on a brief discussion about it on my talk page, it looks like he wants to wait as he plans on watching this series and likely wants to watch the episodes in the order aired.

Anyway, again, Geraldo: GP, I know you don't have a provider and if you want to watch something, you have to purchase from an online vendor like Amazon or iTunes, so I totally understand if you'd rather not purchase this episode just to answer an essentially silly question. But didn't hear back in general, so yeah. :) Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

I really have nothing of value to add here. If multiple people can't make out the words after multiple listenings, I strongly doubt I would be able to either. The transcribers who created the subtitles are pros at this and if they can't figure it out, probably only reading the script will give the info. Also, sometimes, actors don't follow the script exactly so even that may not resolve the issue of what was actually spoken. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:30, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Not sure, "gulk" might be right, I can't think of anything else. nyuszika7h (talk) 16:42, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@GP: I mean, everyone can hear something different, but I do understand where you're coming from. I'll wait and see what IJBall thinks when he gets to it. I'll also see what a friend outside the Internet thinks. Also, question: to a reasonable extent, are actors allowed to make it up as they go? Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Generally no, they are not allowed to ad-lib unless they are a Robin Williams. But basically it depends on the director and whether or not it changes things too much and the hassle of doing a retake. Actors are not perfect and sometimes make minor mistakes that the production people might let slide if it is minor. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:40, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

LOL, GP! Makes sense. One of the season three episodes of Boy Meets World involved somebody putting a fish, I think it was, in Cory's locker, and after Cory opened it and later followed a teacher somewhere, I think, he put the fish back in the locker and tried to close it. However, the door opened again and the fish fell out. My friend thought that's not what was supposed to happen and the fish was supposed to stay put and the door was supposed to close, but they left it in for the entertainment value. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:43, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@Nyuszika7H: It certainly sounds like that based on tone, and even though it may not be appropriate because it references alcohol, it wouldn't surprise me. (Although it still doesn't make sense in context.) Kid and teen, though more kid, sitcoms, and even video games, pretty much always make plays on more adult-oriented terms. An example I can think of is that one episode of Ned's Declassified School Survival Guide regarding the class clown. At one point, I think it's either Ned or Cookie that say something and then say "joking off in class," and that wasn't subtle in the slightest. Two other examples come from Crash Bandicoot 2: Cortex Strikes Back, where one level is called "Piston It Away"—which is more subtle, but once you figure it out, you get why it's funny—and Crash Bandicoot: The Huge Adventure, where one level is called "Snow Job." Yes... See, it's funny because the teenagers and adults will be sitting there laughing while the kids and probably early teenagers are confused over what's so funny. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Piper Reese

Geraldo, I'm requesting that you, and all of your Talk page stalkers (esp. MPFitz1968), take a quick glance at Piper Reese for me, and let me know whether I should immediately frog march that article to WP:AfD or not. Right now, all I see is one WP:RS (The Baltimore Sun) and a whole bunch of WP:SPSs. It looks like a pretty clear WP:GNG "fail" to me... Thanks in advance! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:29, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

May be notable as a celebrity but don't see a lot of support for that either other than SPSs saying so. Only one meets "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Looks like an article created by a close relative as part of a publicity campaign for her. Been an article since 2008 so I would, in general, be willing to let it slide as a legacy. I think a good case could be made for deletion at AfD if you wish to pursue this. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:00, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

The lack of reliable, independent secondary sources in the article, aside from The Baltimore Sun one, makes it quite clear that she doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:BASIC. And reading the criteria for WP:ANYBIO and WP:ENT doesn't convince me the she meets notability for either (especially without non-primary sources). MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:25, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Carlos Santana

@N0n3up: Moved discussion to Talk:Carlos Santana § What nationality?, please continue discussion there. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:02, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Mostly Ghostly: One Night in Doom House

Please take a look at the situation at Mostly Ghostly: One Night in Doom House, please. The 1.32.xx IP is back, with their mix of useful edits, and just plain wrong and disruptive edits. So I'd appreciate you're taking a look at all this... Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:57, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Wikipedia loading issues

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Wikipedia loading issues. I'm trying to see if there are any others affected. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:35, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Advice...

Hi Geraldo. I am really tempted to boldly convert Celina Sinden into a redirect to Reign (TV series), as she is known for that role, and that role alone. (And I've checked, and basically the only sourcing out there is in regards to her role on Reign, so she's a WP:NACTOR fail.) But I wanted to get your opinion on this first – really, what I am soliciting is your opinion on what "best practices" are in terms when to boldly redirect an actor (or musician) Bio article back to the article on their primary notability (e.g. a TV show or musical act) vs. going the "formal" route and taking the article to WP:AfD... Thanks in advance. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:04, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: Redirects with edit history comment referring to NACTOR in this type of case is fairly common but I personally don't see the point when the only info at the destination is basically that the actor is in the show with no other info of value. I'd probably do a PROD then take it to AfD if the PROD is removed. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:04, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, the issue right now is that I literally don't have the time these days to babysit deletion requests at WP:AfD. (Maybe after Christmas!!) That's why I asked in the case of Sinden, because pretty literally her only credit is Reign, so redirecting to Reign seems to be the most logical course of action in her case (and would very likely be the outcome at AfD in any case...). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:44, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Seems reasonable. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:55, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Sabrina Carpenter - discography section

This edit by User:KpopBoy [2] removed the contents of the discography section and the user transferred it to the article Sabrina Carpenter dischography, violating the WP:SPLIT and WP:CWW guidelines as user gave no attribution whatsoever. (I'm guessing the transfer to the misspelled "dischography" article was because the article with the proper spelling is a redirect and user may have thought the article name was not available for creation.) I did revert the edit, but was wondering whether I did something right over at the created article ("dischography"); I slapped a PROD on it, but don't know if speedy delete would've been better. MPFitz1968 (talk) 08:30, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: It was a BOLD SPLIT that did not provide the proper CWW attributions at either the source of destination ends. Unfortunately a common occurrence. I note that Sabrina Carpenter discography exists as a previous attempt at a split - at least that one is at the properly spelled title. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

List of The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles episodes

Hello. Could you explain more detailed to me about revision of my edit. Was it excessive or unverified? So I wouldn't repeat my mistake in the future. --Gavrylo Plyushkin (talk) 16:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

@Gavrylo Plyushkin: The info you added looked like the type of teaser info that belongs in a schedule guide (also appears that that is the source which would be WP:COPYVIO) that doesn't really say anything about the plot details. What we want is for editors to watch the episodes and, in their own words, give a brief summary of what happened in the episode. More than the one line teaser you get in a program guide but a summary and also not a detailed transcription of everything that happened. A short paragraph hitting the key things that happened in the episode would be best. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:32, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I just thought that in the descriptions of those episodes may be more mentions of 93-year-old Indiana Jones, also because one couldn't find descriptions of these scenes elsewhere without watching the rare tv versions of the episodes themselves. --Gavrylo Plyushkin (talk) 16:58, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

List of Winx Club episodes

Regarding this, I have watched the show and the edit is correct, she doesn't usually accompany them on their missions, she's still a "lower-level" fairy. nyuszika7h (talk) 09:07, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

@Nyuszika7H: That edit was part of a series of edits I made trying to undo the damage by 108.56.169.24 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) currently blocked for a year and previous blocked for 6 months. Disruptive, effectively as banned as an IP can get, deletes messages on talk page and basically avoided being block for a month because of that. I didn't give the edits too much consideration as I basically trusted none of them. If you consider the edits valid and are willing to own them please reinstate what you think improve the articles. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:05, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Wizards of Waverly Place season articles - addenda to absence notes in episode summaries by IPv6 user(s)

I've been tracking three questionable edits, two in the season one [3][4] and one in the season two article [5]. In short, the user (I'm assuming one user though with dynamic IP address, which has the same first 64 bits) is adding to a note about an absence something to the effect of "but it is mentioned that they are out of town", which I don't think belongs in an absence note. I reverted all those edits, but the ones in the season one I identified as trivia, and then later checked the prose for the summary of one of the affected episodes (the two episodes affected were "Alex's Choice" and "Alex's Spring Fling"), and it was already stated they (the characters of the absent actors) are out of town. The season two revert, affecting the first episode "Smarty Pants", I indicated that it should be incorporated in the prose of the episode summary (which isn't mentioned in that summary) instead of being in the absence note. As the user has made three such similar edits, it is reaching the point that they are becoming disruptive, but with the dynamic IP, it would be hard to warn them. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:28, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: Could try warning on the IP's talk page, sometimes an IPv6 will stay stable for a while but that does not seem to last more than a day. Other than that we're pretty much stuck using edit history messages for warnings and page protect if disruptive in these cases. I suppose WP:AN3 could work but they don't seem set up for it by normal procedures and admins are still loath to block IPv6/64 ranges even when it is generally well-known that those map to a single person. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:53, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Disney Villains?

Hey, do you have Disney Villains on your watchlist? Someone recently posted about it at WT:DISNEY, and a lot of the recent IP activity there does look questionable... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:27, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: Geez that article is annoying. I'm not sure what is correct and not and the official list is old. Some of the IPs seem to be working on getting it right and others are just adding what they think are villains. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:55, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Redirect category shell

Just thought I'd let you know {{Redirect category shell}} (shortcut: {{Rcat shell}}) is the preferred template now, because some people had usability concerns with {{This is a redirect}}, mainly about using rcat parameters. This template just acts as a wrapper to put the {{R something}} templates in. nyuszika7h (talk) 16:44, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Questions

why is this so? JrJayii (talk) 20:38, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@JrJayii: Wikipedia policy - see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not § FORUM on a wikipedia policy page. Keep discussion on topic about improvements to the article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Crashletes

Heya, Geraldo! How are you? You mentioned you were watching most of them when I asked a long time ago on Nyuszika's talk page, and I don't know if you ever added my sandbox to your watch list to reduce me having to "bug you," LOL, but I've since added some more things to my sandbox lists and I'm not sure where you are in regard to what you're watching. In any case, if you aren't watching it already, I would definitely appreciate some more watchers on Crashletes and its episode list. It doesn't seem to be that busy right now, but you never know with this IP vandals. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:10, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Zap2it#Name change to Screener

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Zap2it#Name change to Screener. nyuszika7h (talk) 20:55, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Dealing with scheduling changes

This also involves Crashletes, but I will be using Jagger Eaton's Mega Life for explaining this.

From the time I added the October episodes on September 22 (diff) until October 6, I'd like to say, both The Futon Critic and Zap2it agreed with that version of the article. However, on October 6, Zap2it changed its listings for the series, giving us this version (diff). However, you can see on Zap2it that it has once again changed, having new episodes air on Tuesdays, starting with what was supposed to air on Friday already being moved to Tuesday. (And, obviously, it disagrees even more with The Futon Critic.) I can confirm "Grinding Rails" did not air yesterday as it's not on my DVR, and I have it set to record all episodes. Not only that, but it seems some episodes have been switched as some listed on The Futon Critic and the current version of the article aren't listed on Zap2it.

While The Futon Critic is 100% correct, especially in the original air date department, it does fall behind on being up-to-date and can stay outdated for a while and not update for a scheduling change, for example, even if said episode has already aired on its new scheduled air date, whereas Zap2it is more on top of updating its listings to reflect scheduling changes, usually, and at least until said episode has aired. Given that, I feel it's safe to once again make the changes in accordance to Zap2it, and I don't think I need to wait to see if episodes will air on October 21, October 28, and November 4, but I wanted to see what your thoughts were. I know we've discussed this once before when we had that small dilemma with three of Nicky, Ricky, Dicky & Dawn's season two episodes. Hopefully, The Futon Critic updates sometime next week. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:09, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

I'd generally say go with the latest info we can get in reliable scheduling guides, which is what you appear to be doing, and as long as it has a reference we are covered with WP:V. Zap2it, schedule guides, and press releases reflect plans which obviously change and don't seem to get updated all at the same time when the network changes its mind about airing plans. Also forward marketing stuff has served its purpose up to point an episode airs so there is no reason to ever update it with what actually happened. Nothing is really fixed until it actually airs. Eventually Futon and copyright office will get the real record of what happened and we can update when that info goes solid. That's about the best we can do. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:26, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, GP. Done! Amaury (talk | contribs) 22:15, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Invisible Sister

Hi Geraldo,

In the last few hours, there has been persistent vandalism from a user or users (IP hopping between an IPv4 and IPv6 address) at Invisible Sister, who has/have been adding false plot information, and also inserting actors/actresses who are not in the film. The IPv4 addresses I've been seeing with this vandalism (in the 67.44.208.0/22 range) I've been seeing for over a month, vandalizing numerous articles about movies, including 1940s and 1950s Westerns (The Battle at Apache Pass, California Conquest, Colorado (film), and The Yellow Tomahawk to name a few), but even more recent movies like Summer Forever (film) and Camp Rock 2: The Final Jam. The IPv4 as well as the IPv6 ones have essentially done the same thing in all these articles, particularly inserting actors/actresses not in the films (and they especially put in some names I'm familiar with from Disney Channel) and falsifying plots.

I am close to requesting semi-protection on Invisible Sister, but I only see one IPv4 and one IPv6 address which have been doing the damage so far, usually I wait till at least three addresses are involved. Could use some more watchers for Invisible Sister and perhaps some of these other films I mentioned. Amaury, IJBall, Nyuszika7H, hope you all don't mind keeping an eye out, too. Thanks. MPFitz1968 (talk) 02:33, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: I believe the same IP vandal recently hit How to Build a Better Boy (check the recent history to see what I mean...). This has become enough of a problem that it may be time to take it to WP:ANI and see if we can get a range block on this. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:35, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: Certainly. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:36, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: Yeah, I think I ran across those edits in How to Build a Better Boy, when scanning these IP's contributions along the way, which is how I traced them to those various 1940s/1950s Westerns. And regarding the range block thing, I did file an ANI report earlier this month (gonna have to find that, because it has since been archived). Didn't seem to see too much activity from that IPv4 range within 48 hours after I filed the report, but yeah, might have to file it again, and possibly one for the related IPv6 users. MPFitz1968 (talk) 02:44, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Found it. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive935#Requesting rangeblock of 67.44.208.0/22 (Will make note that it's in their archive now, so would need to start another report if I pursue this.) MPFitz1968 (talk) 02:49, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: Looks like using 67.44.209.0/24 and 67.44.210.0/24 when checking 67.44.0.0/16 so blocks on both those /24 ranges could be effective. Also looks to be using 2600:100B:B1* which is 2600:100B:B100::/40, a fairly large range with lots of collateral impact if blocked. Best approach so far is get blocks on the 2 IPv4 ranges used and watch current haunts you have identified as he seems to go on runs for a while on a given IPv6. IPv6 blocks look to be futile unless can get a short term /40 block. Geraldo Perez (talk) 13:53, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

In checking the IPv6 it looks like the vast majority of edits in that /40 range in October were the described vandalism so a /40 block may not be too disruptive to other editors on that range. About the only way to track this is to check the /40 range daily for new edits (need to search for the current date) and check to see if vandalism has been repaired. I checked most of the October edits and the articles targeted seem to be well-watched and fixed quickly. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:12, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

IPv6 looks to be Verizon Wireless outlet. I wonder how many people edit wiki using their cellular data plan? Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:29, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

I have just filed an ANI report: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Range block request (67.44.209.0/24, 67.44.210.0/24, 2600:100B:B100::/40). MPFitz1968 (talk) 08:24, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Productive day

Well, today has been a wonderful day, especially because the events of today are still going on. What a productive day, right?

So how's your day? Amaury (talk | contribs) 04:29, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Day's been great, thanks. I notice that your new friends are still following you around, I'd though they'd get bored by now. Hmmm. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:57, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Apparently they have nothing better to do. ;) Amaury (talk | contribs) 05:58, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Selena Gomez rehab

I reverted for this now. I can fully see your argument but I think it perhaps better to tease this one out on the Talk page. I will create a section there. Karst (talk) 11:50, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Awards

I don't remember where you and the others had the discussion before, but I'm still a little fuzzy on when there are exceptions and it's fine to include an award not for a series on the series page. This is the current version of the awards section on Max & Shred, and this is what it was before my clean-up. Did I remove too much? (IJBall, MPFitz1968, Nyuszika7H.) Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:03, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

I remember starting a discussion at Talk:Girl Meets World about an award aimed for a writer, which I was wondering about. I also pointed to a discussion at Talk:K.C. Undercover which happened days before, when the issue was moving awards naming actors/actresses being moved to their articles. After the Girl Meets World discussion, my understanding is that if the award is for an actor/actress and the series name is clearly in the announcement of the award or nomination, it should be in both the series article as well as the one for the actor/actress, but we need reliable sources to verify that. Glancing at those versions of Max & Shred lacked any sourcing, which is not good. MPFitz1968 (talk) 01:25, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Usually actor achievement awards are for that actor performing a role in some named film or TV series and the award text will state both so should count for both actor and project. The issue is for the popularity awards such as favorite actor where the role is not mentioned at all so that shouldn't count as an award for the project and awards for the film or series itself that shouldn't count for the actors. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:39, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Pay attention!

Geraldo,

You mess up my changes and edits to this 2017 Wonder Woman entry without reason. You say I introduce false information, when in fact I have not! I merely make the information MORE correct. Please leave my edits alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.4.229 (talk) 21:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Saying a well referenced spring release date occurs in the summer is blatantly and by definition wrong. Why you keep adding that false info and insisting it is correct is a mystery. It is also unnecessary to give a season when a date is there. Adding false and superfluous info does not improve the article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

The Lodge

Another article to watch if you haven't already from my sandbox. Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:04, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

The cast

See at voice production for the actor. Nonnolo (talk) 20:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello needing help with Myra's page.

Hello,

Could you help me add a photo to her article please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NxGallegos (talk • contribs) 20:49, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

@NxGallegos: See WP:Picture tutorial about how to include properly licensed images in wikipedia articles. Content to be used must be uploaded to wikimedia commons. See commons:commons:licensing. Content must be free-use with no photo use restrictions other than requiring attribution. commons:Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard is a place to ask info about providing release info if the source of the image doesn't include it. The permission queue is long so it is best to source the photo from a site that can prove they own it and has the proper release there. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:01, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Winx Club

Winx club has not yet officially ended as iginio straffi has plans for season 8 that will air after world of winx Acodomy (talk) 10:38, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

@Acodomy: The "last aired" parameter in the infobox does not necessarily mean the series ended. That's why it's not called "series finale". The guidelines state that the parameter may be set to the date of the last aired episode if 12 months have passed without announcement of renewal or cancellation. Do you have a source that the show was actually renewed for an eight season? nyuszika7h (talk) 10:50, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

@Acodomy: § Broadcast Currently states: "The seventh and final season was broadcast on Rai Gulp in 2015" so the article itself is showing the series has not been renewed for an eighth season although that statement is itself unreferenced. The one-year wait to mark the date of the last aired episode in the infobox is mostly to make sure all potential episodes in the production pipe have had a chance to air and give a chance for a renewal or cancellation notice. As Nyuszika7H indicated we would like to see an official well-referenced announcement of an eighth season to add that info to the article. Something more concrete than "plans" that may or may not come to fruition. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:37, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Mostly Ghostly: One Night in Doom House

This article has been recreated, once again (and once again under what looks to me to be somewhat sketchy circumstances...). The wrinkle this time is that they've managed to come up with a single source to cite. Still, this still seems to me to be a clear WP:NFP fail which should be converted back to a redirect. But I dare not do it this time, after I recently had to multiply revert a User:Orchomen IP sock about the same. So, I was hoping you'd take a look at it, and do what you think needs to be done (or not...). Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:13, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: I tagged it for notability and stub. At least it now has a reference that is more than passing mention but it really needs more. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:29, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Rowan Blanchard landed a movie

Rowan Blanchard landed a movie that coming soon. Can you add it please http://www.thewrap.com/zach-galifianakis-to-join-disneys-a-wrinkle-in-time/ http://www.ew.com/article/2016/11/01/wrinkle-in-time-zach-galifianakis-andre-holland-rowan-blanchard — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucar34 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

@Lucar34:

Done. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:38, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Vivian Full

WP:BLPPROD explicitly states "To place a BLPPROD tag, the process requires that the article contain no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc., reliable or otherwise)". There was already an external link to IMDB and therefore not eligible for BLPPROD. Adam9007 (talk) 00:15, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

I see you thanked me for using normal PROD. I felt I had no choice: it was either that or edit war. Adam9007 (talk) 00:36, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@Adam9007: I was never going to edit war on this issue. Just a slight disagreement about how to apply policy and according to WP:BLPPROD you are correct and I was wrong. The wording of the BLPPROD tag text confuses the issue but the policy article is controlling. I likely would have added a regular PROD after your explanation. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:42, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

It's a very common mistake. I wrote an essay on BLPPROD not that long ago to explain this (and also to provide a line of defence if someone wanted to come and tell me off on my talk page :)). Adam9007 (talk) 00:48, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Jamie Spears

That article's suppose to be there, besides I know way more that the Spears family that u, u don't deserve 2 be a Wikipedia editor, get off this website NOW!!!!! M isa R (talk) 19:11, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@M isa R: Articles about people must at least meet WP:BASIC. People are not notable based on who their relatives are, they are notable based on significant coverage in reliable sources and articles created about them must show notability. Jamie Spears is not notable for an article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:21, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

For the record. Jamie Spears was originally the location of an article about Jamie Lynn Spears and was moved to the location of her correct name. The article title is just an incomplete form of her name and is not the formal or common name of her father, who is James Spears and if there were to be an article created for him, that would be the proper title. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:41, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Question, re: WP:RS

This will be a quick one: Is poptower.com even close to being any kind of WP:RS? It's being used as the source on Jack Griffo for his DOB and his fullname, but I'm obviously skeptical that this cuts it in WP:BLP terms... TIA. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:22, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: This and this makes me wonder. Looks like a webscraper and user generated content so looks real dubious as a reliable source. WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 59 § Poptower.com didn't come to a conclusion. Judgement call, and I'd say no. Should get something better in my opinion but might need other points of view at WP:RSN if we really need to depend on it. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:34, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I'll look over the next few days to see if I can come up with anything better (work and time, permitting)... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:37, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

IPv6 Filmography vandal

To Geraldo (and all his TPS): I know Geraldo that you are already aware of the IPv6 vandal that has been removing spacing from the code of Filmography tables (essentially in violation of NotBroken...). But I want to request that everyone basically revert all edits from this IPv6 vandal on sight – their editing is pure disruption (not only Filmography table stuff, but messing with cast lists and cast list ordering, etc.). I don't think I've seen a truly constructive edit from them yet. Considering that this editor also throws in the now-deprecated version of MOS:DATERANGE and the unnecessary use of 'rowspan' into the mix, I'm fairly certain this is a LTA-type that I've been calling the 'rowspan vandal' for probably about a year now. The real issue is that they're an IPv6 hopper, and are using a new IPv6 address every day (if not more often!). So, if Geraldo or any of his TPS see these kinds of edits, please check the IPv6's contribution history, and be prepared to revert everything in sight! TIA... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:25, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Update: IPv6 is back (new IPv6, 'natch), hitting Jack Griffo, among others. Does anyone know anything about IPv6 rangeblocks, to see if asking for such is even feasible in this case?! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:03, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

IPv6 also seems to edit the articles related to the Mario video games article too. – Is this ringing bells with anyone, in terms of an SPT/LTA case?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:08, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: I'll lend a helping hand. I've already added Jack Griffo to my list. Any others? Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:23, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: Luckily, you probably already have many of them on your watchlist already – basically just watch actor/actress articles for Nick and Disney TV shows (the IPv6 seems to focus more on Nick shows...). I'll be on the lookout for any other actor articles this IPv6 vandal hits... For example, the IPv6 just hit Amber Montana while I was writing this. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:37, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: Looks to be in range 2601:81:C401:33CB::/64. I've been watching for a while but can't really identify much real vandalism edits, just his strong opinions about how things should be that go against normal consensus and practice. Major issue is lack of any way to communicate and somewhat of a distain for working with others. Normal pattern is make edits, ignore reverts for a few days, then make the same edits again - repeat until gets article as desired. Basically very low intensity edit warring. It might be possible to get a range block for disruptive editing but a case would have to be made at WP:ANI. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:40, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes – it's more disruptive editing than vandalism (though it's persistent disruption that's starting to border on the latter – ignoring the MOS as this one does is getting close as well...). I wasn't planning on taking this to WP:AIV as a result, but to WP:ANI instead. But between the low satisfaction rate at WP:ANI and my current schedule, I'm in no hurry to go to ANI – for now, I'm just reverting any edit of theirs that's not a bona fide improvement to an article... But I really feel like this is a longer-term player – I suspect the Mario connection may be key to figuring it out. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:45, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

OK, I'm getting closer to wanting to request a range block on this. It's been, what?, a week or more, and this IP is still continuing with a pattern of disruptive editing. It's getting on time for the escalating series of blocks to begin... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:16, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Another one for you...

Hi, Geraldo. Please keep an eye on MarioFan123. M.O.: Unexplained date changes to series premiere and series finale dates at a number of TV series articles (esp. former Nickelodeon series). I can't tell if this is a new iteration of one of your perennial date vandals, or a new player on the scene – you will probably have a better feel for that than I would. If it's one of the older players, a WP:SPI filing may be in order... Just thought you should get a head's up on this. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:53, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: I noticed when he turned up on my watchlist. The edit pattern of mostly incrementing dates is very familiar on the IPs he likely uses. I don't recognize a match with any old user accounts though with this pattern. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:26, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: I sense some wiki-stalking going on based on their contributions. Whether it's Orchomen or not, however, is a different question, but will hold off on an SPI right now. What do the interaction reports show? Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:27, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Not enough behavioral overlap currently. And I think their edits are too scattershot right now for the interaction report to show anything. But we can keep an eye on it... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: I feel like it may be time for an SPI, and I know you and GP are the most familiar with the IPv6 area since that's your suspicion. They're editing only articles we're watching—some of the articles in their contributions I'm not watching myself, but I assume you guys are. I'm holding off for now, but if the SPI case does confirm them to be a sock puppet, I will be reverting all of their edits, at least on the articles I'm watching, and claiming the responsibility of the updated episode counts myself (like you did with a phrasing change on Paradise Run). Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:28, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: The thing is, I'm not seeing any editing from MarioFan123 over the last few days that I'd call "unconstructive" (unlike the IPv6 in the topic uppage whose edits I'd put at about 70-80% unconstructive). MarioFan123's early edits look at first glance to just be the mistakes of a newbie. I'm not saying that it wouldn't be worth it to continue to keep an eye on them (the overlap of editing topics could be a coincidence, or it may not be...). It's just that without clear evidence that this socking/block evasion, there's not much that can be done here – SPI won't run CheckUser checks without some sort of credible evidence of wrongdoing. And I don't think that's coming through in this instance... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:35, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

I agree with IJBall. I've been watching and after the initial issues he appears to be making an attempt to make constructive edits. So far minor changes to articles but looks to be trying to learn. He may or may not be a sock of someone else but I see nothing now to indicate that he is. I suggest just watching and assume good faith for now. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:42, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

IJBall, GP: Just seems a bit odd to me since usually all you see is an occasional pass of updating the number of episodes or what have you on articles from different accounts or IPs, not one account or IP staying on top of things across several articles you watch. But good deal. If you guys don't feel like any alarms are being raised, then I'll just leave it alone as well for now and see. Amaury (talk | contribs) 04:06, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Darth Vader#Appearances section

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Darth Vader#Appearances section. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 13:34, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Geraldo Perez. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Ratings Delays Due to Thanksgiving Holiday

IJBall, MPFitz1968, Nyuszika7H

I don't know if any of you guys super actively add ratings to TV series—or you may as I know there are some articles that you guys watch that I don't—but still thought this would be of interest to you guys: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/ratings-delays-due-to-thanksgiving-holiday.html Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:53, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Excuse Me

I Found A Reference Saying Early 2017 for Sunny Day. Snuggleblanket (talk) 01:20, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

@Snuggleblanket: Then add that reference to the article. We can't just take your word that a reference exists. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Script for spacing

As I'm sure you've seen, sometimes there is excess spacing in articles. Is there a script that can take care of excess spacing at the end of each line? For example, if you have Title = Liv and Maddie-a-Rooney*, the asterisk indicating an excess space, the script would make it Title = Liv and Maddie-a-Rooney. Amaury (talk | contribs) 04:38, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Probably something in WP:AWB will do that. I generally don't think it matters much as it doesn't affect the display. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:53, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Agreed, actually. It's not really that big of a deal. :) I was mostly just curious if such a thing existed and may even look into at some point in the future, but, again, generally doesn't matter, using your words. Amaury (talk | contribs) 05:05, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

iParty with Victorious

User:Ross Lynch Lovers modified the article with this edit, which is using the infobox television template. I reverted the edit [6] citing an inappropriate use of that template, since this is a single episode of iCarly. Ross Lynch Lovers then reverted me [7], with the edit summary "but was released in DVD as film". I still stand by the inappropriate use of the infobox television template, but I haven't re-reverted. MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:46, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: IJBall Made the original change here and the infobox change just reflects that. I started a discussion on the talk page about this. With 3 production codes has a much stronger claim to be a designed Television Movie using the production team of the series as the movie creator. If it was a Movie, it should probably be removed from the episode list but that disrupts a lot of existing related content. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:43, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it's basically a TV movie. And I believe I found sourcing referring to it as such when I sourced List of films broadcast by Nickelodeon... It should probably be designated as a "special" in the episodes list. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:46, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

(Also pinging MPFitz1968) – I'm confused about this: everywhere else, "long" episodes of series like Ned's Declassified are counted as a single episode in terms of the episode list – so why is iParty with Victorious being counted as three separate episodes in the iCarly season 4 episodes list?! Why is iStart a Fan War being counted as two episodes?! This is the exact opposite from the way these kinds of episodes are counted everywhere else! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:40, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Editor choice at the time that decided to count episodes by number of production slots instead of what was actually broadcast and a strong resistance to changing the structure of long-established articles. Episode renumbering, even to correct it, has a lot of collateral impact potentially that would also need to be fixed. I, personally, generally focus my attention on getting it right the first time on current series and don't like jumping into the swampy mess of fixing old articles and the inevitable edit conflicts with people who really don't want them changed. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:01, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

OK, fair enough. But the iCarly way of handling that seems completely arbitrary – e.g. as far as I can tell, iParty with Victorious has never aired as anything other than a 90-minute movie, so counting it as 3 episodes seems silly to me... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:09, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I definitely agree it is silly particularly with 3 production slots used to create that single integrated creative work. The whole iCarly set of articles would need to be reworked, though, if that is changed, for consistency. It is just something that I expect a lot a resistance from the current watchers and initial creators of those articles many of whom are still active. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:16, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Request to talk page

I added a new section at [8] -- maybe we can discuss there instead of using the edit summaries as the main tool for communication perhaps? Sagecandor (talk) 02:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Geraldo, can you please help collaborate and discuss on the talk page in that section? Sagecandor (talk) 02:39, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I was just about to help you out there, GP. Sage, please follow WP:BRD as mentioned. When there is a dispute, articles must remain in a version prior to the challenged edits being done and a WP:CONSENSUS must be reached. Please stop edit warring or there will be consequences for your behavior. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:43, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Edit conflicts appear to have stopped on both sides. :) I won't be doing that anymore and I've made my intentions quite clear to respectfully ask, several times, for talk page discussions at the article talk page. Per WP:BRD, the 3rd step in the cycle is called "discuss". Sagecandor (talk) 02:52, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

The responsibility is on you to discuss since you're the one whose edits are being challenged. You were bold in inserting some information. GP didn't agree with it and reverted you. Now the onus is on you to discuss, not him. Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:03, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Add in edit conflicts and an inability to get a word in edgewise and then accused of not not responding quickly to a discussion that I was actually attempting to do. Oh well. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:05, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

It's disheartening you chose to communicate via edit summaries instead of taking the time to take a break from that tactic and instead decide to post to the talk page as the 3rd step in "bold revert discuss" which is "discuss" at WP:BRD. Note that I did try to do that. And post here to this talk page. And again to the article talk page. Multiple times. I believe all of my requests were worded politely or at the very least matter-of-factly asking for talk page participation, instead of edit summaries. Sagecandor (talk) 03:09, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

It's disheartening that you're trying to blame GP for your actions in failing to follow guidelines because you can't have your way. As I already stated, your edits are the ones being challenged, not GP's; therefore, the responsibility is on you to discuss. It isn't GP's responsibility to make your case on why the note should be there in the open. In addition, per guidelines, whenever there's a dispute, the article must remain on a version prior to the challenged edits taking place until a WP:CONSENSUS is reached one way or the other. All you're doing by continuing to assert on your version by edit warring and reinstating your edits is risking a block. Excluding obvious vandals, administrators do not like to block editors, but will do so to protect Wikipedia from disruption. Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:16, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Wrong. Have not been edit warring or reinstating edits. Have been requesting Geraldo to come to the talk page to discuss which he finally eventually did. Yes, you are right that onus is on me to start the discussion. But impossible to have a discussion when only one party is posting to the talk page and the other party refuses to do so. Sagecandor (talk) 03:18, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

GP did not eventually reply as he was already planning on replying and therefore was not refusing. You just didn't bother to be patient and wanted him to reply immediately. In case you're not aware, people have lives. Perhaps he had to run an errand or the like. You started the discussion at 6:25 PM and GP made his first reply at 6:51 PM. That is only a wait of 26 minutes between you starting the discussion and GP replying, which is not a long wait by any means. Meanwhile, you continued edit warring. Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:29, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Nope. I continued posting to the talk page of the article. And to his user talk page here. He continued edit warring in between and after I posted to both. Quite difficult to have a talk page discussion by oneself. Sagecandor (talk) 03:32, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

He was not edit warring, you were. Knock it off with the false allegations and trying to blame him for the whole fiasco. The responsibility of WP:BRD is on you, not him, because, again, your edits are the ones being challenged, not his. Let me make this as clear as possible: You're in the wrong. He's in the right. And if you can't understand why you were in the wrong after it being explained to you multiple times, then perhaps you shouldn't be editing on Wikipedia. Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:41, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Again, it becomes quite difficult to do the 3rd step of WP:BRD of "discuss", when I tried to do so, and got edit summaries and reverts instead of talk page responses. That is indeed the truth of what occurred. But I guess you want to have WP:The Last Word. Sagecandor (talk) 03:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you, Geraldo, for being agreeable and coming to the talk page at Talk:Peyton List (actress, born 1998) for discussion.

Glad it's all coming to a good resolution with increased clarity, thanks to the participation of AngusWOOF.

Thank you for your candor on the talk page.

Sagecandor (talk) 03:32, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I am glad we were able to come to an amicable conclusion on this. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:43, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Geraldo ! Me too ! I'm so glad you came to the talk page to discuss with me ! I was really impressed by your candor and politeness on the talk page ! It was so much more refreshing that communicating by edit summary ! I was so happy to talk to you on the talk page ! I hope we can have the same level of nice back and forth on the talk page space in the future ! Sagecandor (talk) 03:46, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar

Hey Geraldo !

I give you the "Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar", for being so agreeable to be able to come to the talk page of Talk:Peyton List (actress, born 1998) and "discuss" with me.

I'm so glad we were able to have a nice discussion and work out a prior conflict with the help of AngusWOOF.

Thank you ! Sagecandor (talk) 03:53, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:03, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Geraldo, my pleasure ! Thank you, for the helpful way you wrote in your talk page communications ! Sagecandor (talk) 04:06, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Hatnote question

Geraldo, are hatnotes only appropriate to use when there exists another Wikipedia article on the other subject? I'd like the add a {{Distinguish}} hatnote to Katie Stuart to clarify that that article is for the Canadian actress – an American actress named Katie Stuart also had some roles in the early 2000s, but the American Katie Stuart doesn't have her own article (and is likely deficient in WP:NACTOR terms for her own article anyway...). Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:08, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: We tend to ignore non-notable people as if they don't exist and the intro is upfront about the article being about a Canadian actress so there should be no confusion for people searching for the name. Is there a role that the American actress is prominent in that a redirect could be created to point to at least some information about her? If she has marginal notability as shown by having a significant mention in some articles a redirect at Katie Stuart (American actress) could be created and then the Distinguish hatnote would have a target. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:41, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Let me think that over... I think the answer is "no", because neither American Stuart's role on Titans (U.S. TV series) nor her role on General Hospital were noteworthy enough. So, I'll have to look over any movie roles and see if she headlined anything with an article here. --IJBall (contribs • talk)

Re: 100 Things to Do Before High School

I'm considering requesting protection and just wanted to see if you agreed it was time for it, because this is getting annoying. People can't read. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:25, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

It's annoying but I doubt that protection would be granted for this. Intensity is too low and lots of watchers who can read the hidden notes and understand what they mean. Might be worth a shot to see if some admin will consider it worthwhile to do but I'm not optimistic. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:45, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

High School Musical (franchise)

Geraldo, I dunno if this is on your watchlist, but you may want to take a look at the most recent edit there – I'm not seeming to get across to this editor that a Saturday Night Live skit is not part of the "franchise"... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:53, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Big Time Rush

Hello, can you take a look at Big Time Rush (band) again? The same IP you reverted twice before is adding awards again. At this point, they're up to 63 revisions in a row and counting. I'm not well-versed in what should and shouldn't be in a band article, but you seem to be. — Gestrid (talk) 20:39, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you — Gestrid (talk) 20:48, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Re: Henry Danger

Thank you. Yeah, if we have sources, we include them. And it's not like it didn't happen before. The second season had no new episodes for a while after November 28, 2015, and they did not resume until March 19, 2016. Amaury (talk | contribs) 22:21, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Episode numbering

I don't understand where people get these bugs up their asses to incorrectly change the episode numbering on these Nickelodeon and Disney Channel articles in particular. For example, Indestructible Henry parts one and two aired on two separate dates and are therefore two separate episodes, and just because they sometimes may be shown as an hour showing, like is sometimes the case with Henry and the Bad Girl's two parts, doesn't mean the past suddenly changed and both parts aired on the same date. Something like what the IP did for Indestructible Henry would be more appropriate for the season two finale of List of Make It Pop episodes#Season 2 (2016) as it was two separate episodes not merged per se, but aired back-to-back on the same date. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:53, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

The way he was doing it also really screws up the #epnn anchors in the articles that other articles link to and the renumbering also makes the inbound links that do go to the #epnn anchors go to the wrong list entry. The proper way to renumber is to start a discussion to gain consensus and then commit to correct all the inbound links as part of the effort. Not a trivial task. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:59, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Re: Stuck in the Middle and Bizaardvark

Have a look at all the guest stars for Stuck in the Middle and Bizaardvark. Some of them seem like they would be more appropriate as co-stars, such as "Kid", so how are they receiving guest star credits? And they have had co-stars listed before, so it's not like they're just labeling co-stars as guest stars. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:54, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

I am assuming the guest stars listed were given that credit in the episode end credits or they shouldn't be listed as guest stars. I would be surprised that a non-named role would give the actor a guest star credit but it could happen if the role were significant (or a major name actor in a minor role). Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:00, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

And even some of the guest stars with a named role have seemed like they would have been more appropriate as co-stars since they didn't have many lines. But yeah, I can confirm those are all correct as, between the two articles listed above, I'm the major contributor for the credits on Bizaardvark, such as for tonight's episode, and double-check them if I'm not the one to add them, and MPFitz1968 is the major contributor for the credits on Stuck in the Middle. The only theory I have is that, as you have said sometimes, they have really good negotiators or something of the nature. Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:10, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

It becomes original research to second guess or make evaluations from a primary source. Always best to go with what is written even if it seems wrong. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:19, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Indeed. And the way I look at it is that it doesn't even seem wrong to me because they did it that way for a reason, just like how Dove's body doubles on Liv and Maddie both receive a guest star credit, possibly because they contribute more to the show than mere body doubles would, using your words, something we've already had a discussion about. So while it was unusual to see guest star credits for Kid and Middle-Aged Man Role on tonight's Bizaardvark episode, it didn't seem wrong to me as it was that way for a reason. And as I mentioned earlier, both Bizaardvark and Stuck in the Middle have had co-stars in their credits. Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:29, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

So I've noticed something...

When it comes to Nickelodeon, Disney Channel, and Disney XD, Zap2it does tend to get early information for new upcoming episodes on Disney Channel and Disney XD, but takes a while to get information on new upcoming episodes for Nickelodeon, whereas The Futon Critic tends to get early information for new upcoming episodes on Nickelodeon, at least for some series, but takes a while to get information on new upcoming episodes for Disney Channel and Disney XD. For example, if you take a look at my recent contributions, none of those episodes added for Nickelodeon series are on Zap2it yet and none of the episodes I added a while ago for Disney Channel's Liv and Maddie, Girl Meets World, K.C. Undercover, and Bizaardvark are on The Futon Critic yet. Amaury (talk | contribs) 08:54, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

I have a faint memory of Zap2it being the official outlet of Disney programming guide info and linked to in Disney pages in the past so they may still be getting an exclusive early feed from Disney. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:28, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Paradise Run - Title capitalization

So I obviously know that prepositions, such as "a," "the," etc., are lowercase unless they're at the beginning or end of a title, and hyphens are ignored in order to apply this rule, using your own words here when you brought it up on Liv and Maddie. However, I'm a little confused with one of Paradise Run's upcoming episodes in season two because "something-a-go-go" is a phrase, so I'm not 100% if it works the same way there. I went ahead and changed it from "A" to "a" because I feel like that's correct, but just wanted to see your thoughts. I should know this, but I don't. :x Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

I'd go with the lower case "a" per MOS:CT. Zap2it style guide agrees. The "a" appears to be a shortening of the French "à la" ("in the style of") which is a preposition with fewer than 5 characters which should be lower case per MOS:CT. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:24, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

/facepalm I completed missed that it was lowercase on Zap2it. Thanks, GP! Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:28, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Amaury (talk | contribs) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Amaury (talk | contribs) 08:37, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:54, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

You don't sound too excited. Come on, get into the spirit and look lively, haha! Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:56, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Bah, humbug. 🙂 Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:01, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Actually I am very happy this Christmas and and am enjoying celebrating it. Thanks for the regards, it is appreciated. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:21, 25 December 2016 (UTC)