User talk:Gloss/Archive 1

List of Survivor (U.S. TV series) contestants

Thanks for your work on adding the sort key and cleaning up the links. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 23:22, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Gogo Dodo - no problem at all! I was surprised it wasn't already sorted like that, being an FL and all. But ah well, there's always work to be done. Gloss • talk 23:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Active

Hey Gloss, it's good to see you active again; it's always nice to see a user return. :) Acalamari 13:52, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Acalamari: Thank you! It's good to be back. I've had a lot of free time lately, so I figured "why not?" Gloss • talk 17:49, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Re: Survivor related discussion

Re your message: No, I have not looked it over, but I will. I've just been really busy and, well, the past Survivor season has been a little exhausting for me. I promise I will look it over in the next day or two and comment. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:29, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

I gave you some feedback. Sorry if my comments are a little scattered. I'm still rather exhausted from everything (I might be a little more coherent in a few days after I decompress from B vs. W). I think it is a good first draft, but I think some of the changes went a little too far. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:12, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Re your message: It should probably be a redirect as she has no notability or references outside of Survivor. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

The tags I added

Oh sorry if I offended you by tagging that article! I was just doing what I naturally do when I see issues with an article. Thanks for letting me know though :) Survivorfan1995 (talk) 06:34, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

With the "outdated" tag, I was referring to the fact that only the tribes from Borneo through Gabon are listed. That's kinda ridiculous that it hasn't been updated since season 17 in 2008! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 06:58, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh, okay! Don't get me wrong, I wasn't trying to blame anything on you. I was just doing what I thought was best for the time being. Keep up all the good work! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 07:05, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Brawn vs. Brains vs. Beauty

That one non-Wikipedian doesn't get it. He wants to start an edit war over the Brawn vs. Brains vs. Beauty subtitle despite the citations. Steelbeard1 (talk) 17:49, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I've left them a warning on their talk page about the edit warring. Being that multiple editors have inserted the subtitle and placed reliable sources alongside of it, there's no reason for its' removal. Gloss • talk 17:51, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I reported that edit warring IP. Steelbeard1 (talk) 18:51, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Well I'm not sure if they'll be blocked just yet as I gave them a final warning and they haven't edited since. Gloss • talk 18:53, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

He's been blocked for 24 hours. Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:30, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

List of Survivor tribes

Hi there! Thanks for adding the references, but is the IMDb really the only source available? According to Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites#IMDb, it looks like it's usually not ok to cite the IMDb, because it's not considered reliable. Can we find any sources that might be better? Thanks! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 01:19, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: I looked around for better sources, couldn't find anything. While IMDb isn't considered a reliable source for most BLP biography information, it's usually OK for cast information and the like. So it shouldn't be anywhere near a problem having it there until any better sources can be found. Gloss • talk 01:22, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, I got the rustle feathers joke! You were talking about the thing Hayden said a couple of weeks ago. Don't get me wrong, I'm a very extroverted, fun type of guy and love to talk as much as anybody. I just didn't want to take the conversation too far beyond encyclopedia-related discussion since that's not what Wikipedia is for. But I am a super fan of Survivor, just to let you know! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 03:59, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

It's really okay, Wikipedia is nothing without it's users and it's users can't collaborate if they never become friendly with one another, eh? Gloss • talk 04:04, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, you're probably right :) Survivorfan1995 (talk) 04:06, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't the members of the pre-merged tribes also be listed? Some readers might wonder why they're not there :) Survivorfan1995 (talk) .07:55, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: I'm working on it in a sandbox. It's a bit of a task, so it's taken longer than the post-merge tribes but no worries, it's being worked on. Gloss • talk 16:30, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Angie Layton

Outside of Survivor, she has several model titles such as Miss Utah Teen USA 2010 and Miss Utah 2014. Do the Miss USA beauty pageants not make her notable enough for her own article? WP:ONEEVENT shouldn't apply because she is both a model with titles to her name and a contestant of a very notable television show.--Ointment09 (talk) 22:57, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Ami Cusack

Are you absolutely sure about redirecting Ami Cusack? She does appear to have some notability beyond Survivor. I'd admit that some contestants really shouldn't have articles, but I'd have kept hers. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 16:52, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: We have a decent amount of contestant articles that violate WP:BLP1E so I've been going through and getting rid of some of them (admittedly, boldly). I personally feel that beyond Survivor, all she has is a few modeling shoots with insufficient source covering (based on some web searches). She was in a playboy shoot but nowhere near the star of her issue, she had a few pictures taken is all. However, if you feel this one should have been kept, we can always revert the changes and open an AfD? Gloss • talk 16:59, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, I suppose you could be right about that one. Okay, I've looked through the other articles and the only other ones that definitively should be redirected are Kim Spradlin, Tom Westman, J.T. Thomas (Survivor contestant), Chris Daugherty, Todd Herzog, Sandra Diaz-Twine, and Robert Crowley (Survivor contestant), and Tina Wesson. Jennifer Lyon might be open to debate. Other than that, I think everybody else has some notability. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 18:21, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: I agree with all of those. I'll go get to work. Gloss • talk 19:42, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Meaning all besides Tina and Jennifer, which I will look further into. Gloss • talk 20:04, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

I already took care of Kim, so that's one less you'll have to do! I'll help with some of the others too. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 01:00, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I see you've already gotten those done! You're way ahead of me here! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 01:03, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Tyson Apostol

Hi. Are you sure Tyson shouldn't have his own article? His article was nominated for deletion a couple years back and the result was to keep. I would argue that he does have some notability beyond Survivor as is shown in the article. I just think that the article probably needs some expansion. You think we should get consensus on this one? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 05:13, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

If you'd like. The only information in the article was on his Survivor experiences so I didn't see much that could have been expanded outside of that. What did you think could have been expanded? Gloss • talk 05:30, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

All of the fame Tyson has received has been from Survivor. Anything else he's done in his life hasn't been notable enough to appear online. Unfortunately appearing on three seasons isn't even enough to pass around WP:BLP1E - he's known for Survivor, any and all important information on his time on Survivor is covered in the three articles on the three seasons he was in. I looked over the AfD from a couple years back and it seems as though the majority of strong arguments were for deletion while the keep arguments were from fans who didn't quite get BLP1E. Gloss • talk 05:42, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, that is a good point. But it makes me wonder why the reviewing admin decided to keep it. But you don't think him being a cyclist or a Mormon missionary also makes him notable? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 05:48, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Well there wasn't a clear consensus. In AfDs where there is no consensus, the default is to keep. And I can't say I think those things make him notable. Things you do in your personal life don't make you notable simply because they're out of the ordinary. If he was some kind of cycling champion or there was something significant that occurred while he was a missionary I'd probably have a different opinion. A lot of Survivor contestants are cool things or have done cool things... that's half the reason CBS casts them. But to provide another example, if a contestant was a swimmer outside of their Survivor career, that wouldn't be enough to make them notable. If they competed in swimming competitions or won swimming championships, you know, did anything significant in regards to swimming (or in Tyson's case, cycling), then perhaps they'd have more than just one event to claim notability for. Just doesn't seem to me that this is the case with Tyson. Gloss • talk 06:00, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: - being that Tyson is most notable for his winning season, rather than the seasons where he was eliminated early on, does it make sense to you at all why I had the page redirected to Blood vs. Water instead of the contestants page? Sandra is redirected to the contestants page because she won two seasons, so to avoid picking one, the contestants page is an easy compromise. But being that Tyson is most notable for Blood vs. Water, as he won it, I'd say the best redirect location would be to that season's page. Gloss • talk 19:43, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

That's a good point, but I think Tyson voting himself out of Heroes vs. Villains (which, by the way, I still think is one of the best moves ever, on Russell's part!!) is still a legendary moment in Survivor history that fans will remember him for. Therefore, the contestants page is probably the best redirect in my opinion. Any second thoughts? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 02:36, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: I'm sure some hardcore fans like yourself will always remember that move... but in the public eye, in terms of notability, he's absolutely best known for his winning season. It's like an actress can do a bunch of memorable movies but once you star in that breakthrough film that sets off your career, that's what people know you for. He had good moments on other seasons but I can't find myself agreeing with the redirect location. I don't mean to sound dramatic, this isn't the end of the world in any way, shape, or form. Gloss • talk 05:38, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I know exactly what you're saying. But do you think if we did move the redirect back to Blood vs Water, that readers could get the impression that this was the only season he was on? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 06:06, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: Luckily the article on Blood vs. Water contains information right in the lead about the season featuring returning players, and the contestants section lists the two seasons Tyson was on right underneath his name. Also, even if they did get the impression he was only on this season, it's not too problematic as he didn't play a key role in either of the other seasons he was on. But I don't think it will be a problem. Gloss • talk 06:10, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Yousef bkw

Hello Gloss. I am just letting you know that I deleted Yousef bkw, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 08:26, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Tina Wesson

Do you think that Tina's page should be deleted? Dobbyelf62 (talk) 16:45, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

@Dobbyelf62: I haven't yet gotten around to this one yet but I will check it out today. Initially it does look like it should be redirected but before I redirect an article I'll usually perform some google searches to see if anything besides (in this case) Survivor comes up. If nothing does come up, a redirect is usually the best bet. Gloss • talk 16:48, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Survivor Borneo

Looks good! The same should be done for the other seasons. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 17:14, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

@Dobbyelf62: Glad you think so! If you'd like or wouldn't mind, feel free to add your input to the discussion (Talk:Survivor (U.S. TV series) so we can keep all of the comments and opinions grouped together! Gloss • talk 17:16, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Re:Blood vs. Water

Hello, Gloss. You have new messages at Katanin's talk page.
Message added 21:05, 27 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Survivor voting history

Hello, I understand your issue with dead space at the end of the page caused by placing the Jury vote table on the next, however by using the "width=100%" function, it bloats smaller tables, such as post-merge voting histories (like in BvW) and jury votes unnecessarily. I have edited the Survivor: Borneo table in a matter that I hope satisfies both of our specifications. If a table doesn't need to be larger, then why do it? I am just confused as to why you want the tables to hit the end. It's one thing to do the opposite, such as splitting up the BvW or Caramoan tables because they're too wide for the page, but making sure that they take up the full width is not something I have yet to grasp. - Katanin (talk) 21:27, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

@Katanin: Your compromise works fine for me. I'm sorry, it isn't that I'm looking for every table to perfectly hit the end of the page (yes I originally did so, but it wasn't something I feel or felt strongly about), but when there is room at the end of the voting table I just feel like we can put the Jury Vote table next to it...with the goal being to remove the overwhelming amount of dead space between the Jury Vote and the end of the page. Also, I don't see a problem with bloating the smaller tables a bit but if it is an issue, that's okay. Gloss • talk 21:42, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Another note.. I really like this improvement. Thanks! Gloss • talk 21:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Re: Those links

Re your message: This is not the first time CBS has reorganized the structure of their website. The episode summaries are under the More drop down on the Survivor website, then you can use the triangles on the top to change seasons. After clicking one of the seasons, their naming convention for the URLs is fairly obvious. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:05, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Re your message: Sorry about the notifications. I thought I was avoiding that by changing the edit summary, but I see that notifications isn't based upon that (I see what it is doing now). If it wasn't the notifications, I would have swamped your watchlist. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:22, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

More redirects

Do Bobby Jon, Kelly W and Colleen really need their own page? I don't see any reason to keep these. Phillip and Jenna Lyon might not need one either. What are your thoughts? Dobbyelf62 (talk) 16:32, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

@Dobbyelf62: I believe Colleen has done some work outside of Survivor. Jenn Lyon I believe was also involved in something, I'll need to check on that. The others are likely good to be redirected. I've been considering them for a while and I'll do some more research to find any missing information soon, that could determine their full notability. Gloss • talk 16:35, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

True, it does say that Colleen has done some acting outside of Survivor. The only problem is that none of this is sourced, none of it! All of these articles are poorly sourced as they really didn't do anything outside of Survivor. If someone mentioned Colleen's name, the first thing that would come to your mind would be a survivor contestant, not an actor. Same goes for Jenn. There's probably a survivor wiki that has information on these people anyways. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 16:45, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

@Dobbyelf62: Well that is where we editors come in! If the article is unsourced the first step is to look for sources. Only when none can be found do I usually begin to fully question the individual's (lack of) notability. So you're free to look around yourself if you'd like, though I'm sure I'll get around to those articles sooner or later. And unfortunately, Survivor Wiki is not a reliable source so taking any information from them won't benefit us. Gloss • talk 16:48, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

True, Colleen has done some acting outside of Survivor, so I'll be sure to source that sooner or later. I'll have to get to Jenn later. I am we'll aware that survivor wiki isn't reliable (in fact most wikis aren't). I was just saying that if people really wanted to, they could easily just check there. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 16:58, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

@Dobbyelf62: Sorry, misunderstood your original comment then! Gloss • talk 17:00, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Re:WikiCup

Hi- are you properly back? You're welcome to take part, if you want! We've got 110 signed up for this year already but we'll get some more over the next few weeks. I don't know how much you've been following the Cup, but "bonus points" for highly important articles are the flavour of the month right now- the finalists are generally producing articles on more significant topics to get the big scores. Good to hear from you! J Milburn (talk) 17:07, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Phillip Sheppard

Are you sure Phillip is only notable for one thing? I mean, he does have a novel that appears to have been pretty successful. Do you think we should create an article about the novel instead? Just thought I'd ask. Oh, and by the way, keep up all the good work on these Survivor articles! I was a bit skeptical about it at first, but you're really doing a good job! Happy New Year! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 20:47, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: I absolutely think an article about the novel would work best. I appreciate the feedback and I'm glad the changes are sitting well with you! Gloss • talk 20:54, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh and of course, Happy New Year to you as well! Gloss • talk 21:00, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Do you happen to be familiar with his novel? I could create an article about it, but I've never been into books a whole lot (I usually hated reading when I was in school). But Phillip is one of my favorite Survivor players ever, so his book might be interesting to check out. I've just generally preferred to watch movies and TV instead of reading. Oh, one more thing, I finally expanded my user page so feel free to check that out if you want! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 21:20, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with it at all, and I do have a mental list of things I'm planning to work on.. which that article would go at the bottom of. I'm sure one of us or someone will get to it eventually. But in the mean time, any information on Phillip can be found in the articles of the two seasons he played. Gloss • talk 21:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Fixes

Hey, thanks for those minor fixes on Survior Tocantins! Those were really dumb mistakes on my part :) Survivorfan1995 (talk) 22:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: No problem. Gloss • talk 00:13, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

A personalized New Year greeting

Hope you have a bright 2014! Acalamari 13:56, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Gloss, Happy New Year! I know I said it before, but yes, it's good that you're back. :) Best. Acalamari 13:56, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

@Acalamari: Thanks for the smile :) Happy New Year to you as well! Gloss • talk 14:02, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Jennifer Lyon

Well, as I was removing links to other redirected pages, I started to wonder exactly why an article with no links to it needed to be redirected instead of being just deleted. With no links to it, who would even come across the page to be redirected to Survivor: Palau in the first place? I just assumed that if I blanked the page, an admin would come by and delete the article altogether. But if you think it's better the other way, I have no problem with that. I just thought I'd try something different and see how well it went over. We could discuss it if you like. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 02:33, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

I guess you're right; redirecting probably is better. But about the deletion thing, I have known blanking a page to result in deletion. I once created a category that was wrongly named; I just blanked that page and created a new category and the page was gone within hours. I just wanted to see if the same thing would work on an article I didn't create. But I guess we're both in trouble now. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 02:48, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

True, but the same thing happened with Tyson. We redirected his article, despite a prior consensus to keep. Besides, Jenn's article clearly need to go; I have no idea why they decided to keep it anyway. Everybody said "delete".Survivorfan1995 (talk) 03:10, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that link. I have no idea why I didn't see that 2nd discussion before. It looks like her article might, just might could be kept, but it's definitely gonna need to be expanded to include these other important aspects of her life.

Okay, I sincerely apologize. I should have known better. Thanks. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 04:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Admin notice board discussion

Uh-oh. Have u seen the latest? Looks like we may have been doing something wrong after all. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 03:25, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

James Avery Age

On the talk page of the James Avery (actor) article you have said that reliable sources have verified he was 68, born 1945. But that source of information has only come from the publicist who said he was 68 which many media have used. However public records [1] show his date of birth as 27 Nov 1948 making 65. I would consider this to be the most reliable source. Before his death and before his publicist announced his age as 68 when he died sources online had his date of birth as 1948. I would say that the publicist has been in error. 79.97.208.89 (talk) 03:32, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Also to just add the following pdf [2] which shows details of an interview with him which shows his year of birth being 1948 79.97.208.89 (talk) 03:50, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Redirects

I seriously doubt these guys have much notability beyond Survivor. Like you told me about Tyson, just because somebody's done some cool stuff doesn't make them notable. Jeff's an anchor for a local news station, Hayden was a game show contestant on two shows, and Coach is a music conductor. These things by themselves don't constitute notability for the encyclopedia. They need to be significant people. Everybody else seems good for now, but I'm just not seeing that these three pass the notability guidelines. Are you absolutely sure I need to get consensus? Some of the previous discussions for these articles had pretty weak arguments. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 05:36, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: Yes, not because of personal feelings, because I don't believe the community would agree that any of these three fail to meet our notability guidelines. Tyson's might have been debatable too, and if you or anyone feels strongly against the redirect, that's okay and it can be undone. I think the best course here on out is to start bringing the articles to AfD to gain a consensus. If it's an easy decision, it'll be quick and painless anyways. Gloss • talk 05:41, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I can start AFDs if that's the best thing. I'm just a little confused about why the community would object. I mean, are they unfamiliar with the guidelines or something? Are their opinions swayed by the fact that they're fans of the show? Don't get me wrong, some of these articles, I really didn't want to throw in the trash either, but I just wasn't seeing that they met the guidelines so I just thought I'd enforce the rules. But I'm open to other people's suggestions and I'm willing to revert my work if that's what's best. The only other one I'm still unsure about is Stephanie. Do you have an opinion about whether her article should be kept? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 05:54, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: I believe the community may object because with the few AfDs out there right now, there is already a lot of opposition to their deletions. Their opinions are likely swayed by the fact that they are NOT all fans and have a neutral POV. If you could revert your edits in the meantime while discussion is going on, I think it would be best. And as for Stephenie, I think she's good. Gloss • talk 05:58, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! I guess I need to be less impulsive sometimes and try harder to work with other people. I've been with Wikipedia for several months now, but I haven't been too heavily involved with deletion discussions till recently. But, yes, I'd be happy to revert my edits for now. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 06:05, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Kim Spradlin

Binksternet just doesn't get it. Half of these deletion discussions are stupid and laughable. I don't know why some users have to make them so complicated. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 02:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: One person's opinion won't be the deciding factor in an AfD either way, so don't stress out too much. Gloss • talk 02:16, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Kim Spradlin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sprint

Survivor: Gabon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sprint

Survivor: Tocantins (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sprint

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Russell Hantz

Hey, in case you didn't know about it, Russell used to have his own article, but it got redirected for "notability" reasons. I think if Coach and Stephanie are acceptable, Russell definitely would be too. I and another user are talking resurrecting this article on the grounds that it can be rewritten to prove notability. I have a copy of the bio here in my sandbox and I'm trying to rework it. I'm planning to expand the Flipped Off section, the Survivor: Redemption Island section, and rework the lead section for neutrality. Got any other suggestions on how it could be improved? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 18:11, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: The information leak was a big deal when it happened too, so if there's anything that can be expanded there, it would surely help out! Gloss • talk 18:13, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 18:14, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Alright, I've expanded the part about the information leaks like you suggested. Better now? I've also done some other improvements to the article, but I've still gotta make a few more tweaks to the lead, the business section, and the personal life section before it'll be ready to go. Got any more suggestions? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 03:34, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: The first thing I see is that both survivor sections are really long and detailed. We only need the main points. But that's not a huge issue. I'd say feel free to move it into the actual article whenever you'd like. It's good enough to go. Gloss • talk 03:55, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

WP:3RR

Gloss,

You'll probably find it ironic to hear about this from me, but can you help me convince @Monterrosa: not to violate WP:3RR? Help would be appreciated.

XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 01:34, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

@XXSNUGGUMSXX: What article should I be looking at? Gloss • talk 05:17, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Seth MacFarlane XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 05:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

@XXSNUGGUMSXX: It looks to me like a lot of these infobox changes are things you're changing that have been a certain way for a very long time and most editors you've come in contact with haven't agreed with these changes. Now I can't warn Monterrosa about this without also warning you, because there seems to be a lot of back-and-forth going on. I'd recommend you slow down with the infobox changes and bring it to a talk page to get a consensus before continuing on. Gloss • talk 15:40, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Understood. Just for the record, my basis for such edits was Beyoncé Knowles article.XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 16:23, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

@XXSNUGGUMSXX: Well it also looks like on that article there was some opposition to the changes you made. If you feel strongly about a change that another editor reverts, as I've said before, the BEST way to go about implementing it is to get a small discussion going on the talk page. Gloss • talk 16:26, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Understatement

To say Vjmlhds and I "don't mix well" is an understatement. But for the sake of WP:CIV, I have taken your input seriously, and will avoid Vjmlhds whenever possible. FWIW, most friction as of late has been limited to our respective talk pages. Levdr1lp / talk 08:37, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

@Levdr1lostpassword: I see that. It looks like this has been going on for over a year, at the last. Really unhealthy for a project like this that is supposed to be enjoyable. I'm happy to hear you'll avoid him. From what I've read, it does seem like you were coming down a bit hard on him, to be honest. I can understand where it gets frustrating but try to remind yourself "who cares what someone else is doing?" As long as it isn't affecting you at all, don't let it bother you. You asked him to leave your userpage alone a few weeks ago and he agreed, so another post reminding him about it was just beating a dead horse. I'm sure you understand, and I thank you for taking my advise seriously. Gloss • talk 16:45, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for replying. I posted that message several hours ago, and now that I've had a chance to cool off, I regret it somewhat. The truth is that while Vjmlhds and I have had some fierce disagreements, there has also been genuine civility, especially as of late. Believe it or not, the relationship has improved dramatically over the past year. When I first encountered him nearly three years ago, there was difficulty. In general, he wouldn't use his talk page, he wouldn't source his edits, he routinely edit-warred, and, occasionally, he'd lash out with personal attacks. It was was so bad that at one point an administrator encouraged me to open a discussion at WP:ANI. But things have improved since then. Yes, we sometimes engage in overly long discussions on our talk pages, but ultimately, I find them constructive (if for no other reason they allow us to hash things away from actual content). Personally, I would like to find a way for us to cooperate. I know we can. Levdr1lp / talk 17:12, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Links in Catching Fire plot

I just got done linking all the Districts and all the characters of Catching Fire to their articles. Please don't undo it and call it a copyedit. You keep restoring the new plot, I am working from an old plot from the November history, which was less than 700 words. Elizium23 (talk) 03:24, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

@Elizium23: I've fixed the links to how you had it. However I did make copyedits to the section, removing things the plot can read just fine without. The version I've reverted to has less than 700 words, should not be a problem. Gloss • talk 03:27, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Still missing links to the Districts. Elizium23 (talk) 03:30, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Which can be added... Gloss • talk 03:31, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Please do so, thanks! Elizium23 (talk) 03:33, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 2, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jeffrey Wright (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Everything okay?

Hi Gloss, I deleted all those pages in your userspace for you (saw them while taking a random look at CSD). I hope I was merely clearing out some of your old pages and that everything is okay! Best. Acalamari 11:38, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

@Acalamari: Yes, everything is okay! Didn't mean to draw any attention, just going through tagging some pages that I don't need around anymore (including a lot of things from my earlier years on here). Thanks for the concern :) Gloss • talk 17:15, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Good, glad to hear that! :) Acalamari 17:18, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

@Acalamari: I was really looking for a fresh start when I changed my name, so now I'm just cleaning out my closet. Gloss • talk 17:20, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

That's completely understandable; it's just that when I see a familiar highly active editor request that a load of their userspace be deleted, I tend to get worried! I should have a look at what I can remove from my userspace, if there's anything. :o Acalamari 17:35, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for List of New York Islanders players

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 00:02, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Editor's Barnstar
		For all your work in cleaning up the Survivor articles! Nice job! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 21:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: Thank you very much! All of the main changes across all 27 seasons are completed :) Gloss • talk 03:45, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Survivor: Cook Islands

My edits to the pictures in Survivor: Cook Islands were a response to this request at the Help Desk
The problem with composing page layouts are that they look radically different depending on what they are viewed on, which can be from a huge HD internat enabled screen, to a phone. Personally, with my screen settings, the current arrangement looks poor, as the photos drift down past the first table and the intervening text alongside the second table - but, as I say, the changes were made at the request of another user. Can I suggest you discuss this with Survivorfan1995 (talk) who raised it at the Help desk - Thanks Arjayay (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: - I don't see anything wrong with the way it looks now. If the issue is that it runs down into the next section, we can remove one of the images. The images are only there to fill in some of the dead space next to the table and provide an example of what one or two of the contestants look like. Having them in a gallery at the top makes it seem like this section is only about those pictured players. On my screen, there isn't much of a gap between the table and the images, though I don't know what that looks like on your screen. But since everyone works with different screens, not everyone can always be pleased. So in this case it might make the most sense to stick with the format that articles have been using for as long as they've been around.. with the pictures to the right of the table - that hasn't had any complaints before that I'm aware about. Gloss • talk 18:50, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

No, the images are all in a tall stack at the right, but they won't go beside the chart because the chart is too wide (since this season had four tribes instead of the usual two). Instead, they're stacked on top of the chart with a bunch of white space to their left. It looks very weird the way it is now. The same problem is over at Survivor: South Pacific#Contestants. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 19:23, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I can mimic the same appearance Survivorfan1995 is reporting by either reducing the pixels on my screen, or increasing the zoom level to 150%, both of which will mimic a fairly typical screen layout, as I use a 24" screen on HD. Arjayay (talk) 19:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

What kind of laptop/browser are you guys using. I'm using a Macbook/Safari and it looks perfectly fine to me. So I'm not sure what a fix to this could be because I can't see the problem. Perhaps making the images smaller? 150px? Gloss • talk 19:48, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm using an iPad mini/Safari. I've also got access to a Windows 7/Internet Explorer but I haven't been using it so much now that I've got my iPad. I'm not sure Safari vs. Internet Explorer would make a whole lot of difference. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 20:00, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

BTW, you can always check out my user page, as I've mentioned there (among other stuff) what kind of system I use :) Survivorfan1995 (talk) 20:17, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

@User:Arjayay: are you using Internet Explorer? Gimmie a couple minutes, I'll fire up the PC and see what the article looks like there (that thing takes forever to boot now). Be back in a few. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 20:25, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Alright, I'm logged in on the PC and the article doesn't look any different on Internet Explorer. I still think we need to do something about it. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 20:35, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

@Gloss & User:Arjayay: I personally don't see a problem with this right here. If you guys have got any other ideas, feel free to experiment in my sandbox. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 21:02, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: There is no problem on my screen and I can't say I like having the images above the contestants table. It breaks the consistency from the other articles. Can you somehow show me a screenshot of what it looks like to you? Gloss • talk 21:34, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I wish I could but I can't upload an image to anything but an article; it's not allowed on talk pages or anything like that :( Survivorfan1995 (talk) 21:37, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Why do you say that? You can upload it and post it here. Gloss • talk 21:38, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

That's what it said on the file upload wizard. When I typed in that I wanted to use it here, it said that it couldn't be done because it wasn't an encyclopedia article. And it's not like it'd be a public domain picture, since it's a website screenshot. You know what I'm saying?Survivorfan1995 (talk) 21:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm not too sure how that works. Hmm Gloss • talk 21:41, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

okay, could you try uploading a screenshot of your screen? Maybe we'll both learn something. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 21:43, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Alright, here's a rough depiction of what I'm seeing: (images removed after message was read Gloss • talk 23:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC))

The chart doesn't begin until waaaaaaay down here (it's wider than most of the other charts since this season had four tribes instead of the usual two).You see all the white space to the left of the images? That's what the article looks like to me on both the iPad and the PC. I hope this helps. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 22:24, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I understand. But does it fix it when you make the images smaller? Have you tried that? Gloss • talk 22:48, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Somehow I don't think that'd work because the chart is roughly as wide as the page itself. Any other ideas? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 22:54, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I set a permanent width (65%) so it doesn't take up the whole page. Did that work? Gloss • talk 23:02, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

No, sorry :( It doesn't look any different than before. Do you think we should maybe start some kind of consensus on that way I suggested in my second sandbox? Maybe that'd be a better way to get something worked out. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 23:11, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Not exactly "we" - I don't like that suggestion so if you want a consensus on that, it'll be all you buddy. Gloss • talk 23:14, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh sorry! You're right. My mistake. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 23:16, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Hey one more quick question. How exactly do I start a consensus anyway? Do I post it on the article's talk page? How would I get other people to notice it? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 23:20, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Post on the article's talk page (or in this case, I'd post on the main Survivor US talk page as that's probably got more people watching the page. Propose your idea and just see how the feedback goes. Gloss • talk 23:41, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Josh Hutcherson

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Josh Hutcherson you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of IndianBio -- IndianBio (talk) 06:10, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Katie Gallagher

Hey, thanks for removing that wrong image. I put it there because she's in the "Survivor contestants" category over at Commons and when I typed her name in here on Wikipedia, it redirects to Survivor: Palau. So evidently something's been mixed up here. Do you happen to know who that Katie is? I don't remember a whole lot about Survivor: Palau, so I wouldn't know her face even if it was her. Any help to straighten this out? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 07:10, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Doesn't seem like too big of a problem. I'll take a look at the category at Commons. I have no idea who that Katie is but I happened to just finish watching Palau for maybe the fourth time last week :P Gloss • talk 07:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Commons username change request

I am requesting a rename on Commons. My current Commons name is IMatthew. Gloss • talk 05:25, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

The first

Hi Gloss, I appreciate the early congratulations. :) Thank you for that, for your support and for being the last person in a long line of many over the years to encourage me to run for RfB. I am both surprised and pleased by the last week; I could not have asked for an easier candidacy! I look forward to our continued interactions! Acalamari 10:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi!

Okay, obviously since I'm new. Can you please explain to me the how to upload images to Wikipedia without them being deleted? Banshee01 (talk) 23:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

@Banshee01: Hey there! The problem with the images you've uploaded so far is that they are from other websites online and not your own pictures. For the most part, uploading an image you found elsewhere online is not permitted unless the author of that image has released it into the public domain. It can be hard to identify which images are and aren't okay to be uploaded here, but I'll direct you to WP:IMAGES - you can look around there to learn more information about uploading images. I'll also leave you with the name of another user I know that can answer any image-related questions you have much better than I can: User:J Milburn - he has a lot of experience with images on Wikipedia. :) Gloss • talk 00:06, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Josh Hutcherson

The article Josh Hutcherson you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Josh Hutcherson for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of IndianBio -- IndianBio (talk) 05:52, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Million Award!

		The Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Josh Hutcherson (estimated annual readership: 1,800,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! -- Bobnorwal (talk) 16:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't know a thing about "The Hunger Games" (?) myself, but I hear the kids like it. Lord knows this article has plenty of views, and I just wanted to congratulate you on bringing this particular high-traffic article up to snuff. :) Bobnorwal (talk) 16:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

@Bobnorwal: Thank you! This article has been my main project since returning from a long retirement so it's really nice to see it pass and be rewarded for it. :) Gloss • talk 18:11, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Philip Seymour Hoffman

Whoops sorry I only meant to add the caption, I don't know what the other stuff is. LADY LOTUS • TALK 19:31, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

@Lady Lotus: No worries! I figured we got into an edit conflict and you copy and pasted the whole page before you saved your edit. That's usually the cause of the previous edit being reverted like that. It should be all good now :) Gloss • talk 19:32, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Following?

I can't help but wonder..... are you intentionally following my edits? I wouldn't go so far as to call you a stalker (and hope you don't become one), but it is interesting how you sometimes seem to follow my edits rather closely..... especially since you just re-added IMDb for five articles I removed it from (due to it not being seen as a reliable source)..... XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 21:09, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

@XXSNUGGUMSXX: When I see somebody making the same edit across multiple pages I have on my watchlist, all performing the same action (removing IMDb in this case) - I take a look at their contributions to see where else (if anywhere) they were making those edits in order for me to undo them (when necessary). We happen to edit a lot of the same articles, so your edits pop up on my watchlist very often. I have no interest in following or stalking your edits. Gloss • talk 22:03, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

OK, just checking. Carry on. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 22:05, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

The Hunger Games

Are you a fan buddy? :) —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 06:56, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

@IndianBio: I am! Gloss • talk 07:03, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Well thought of general chit-chat. Wonder who's gonna play the gamekeeper in Mockingjay now that Philip Seymour has passed away. :( —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 07:55, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Ah, well fortunately the films will be unaffected as the majority of filming has been completed, according to Lionsgate. Gloss • talk 15:44, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Half Barnstar
		Awarded by Vjmlhds for being part of the cumulative effort to rescue WWE Raw 1000 from deletion Vjmlhds (talk) 21:22, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

@Vjmlhds: Appreciate it, thanks. Gloss • talk 21:28, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

@Gloss: You're welcome, and thanks for pitching in. Vjmlhds (talk) 21:31, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

OSU

Regarding the template on the OSU page:

I was trying to nominate the article for selected status on the Ohio Portal, and added the template to it's talk page per the instructions. For whatever reason, it didn't translate. Vjmlhds (talk) 17:51, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

P.S. - Point taken about the awards.

Hi

Good to see you've come back to Wikipedia. I wouldn't have even known it was you if I hadn't followed a link from an old talk page. —Soap— 03:31, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

@Soap: Good to see you're still here! There's mostly an entirely new group of editors around these days.. so when I renamed, I sort of dropped the old name quicker than I expected because nobody remembered me anyways (besides a select few). I'm glad you found that old talk page though :) Gloss • talk 03:36, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Talk Header

Hi,

Is there are reason why you added {{talkheader}} to Talk:Marie-Claude Asselin? Per the documentation for the template:

This template should be used only when needed. There is no need to add this template to every talk page. Do not create a talk page that contains only this template.

Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 21:03, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

@Whpq: Hi, I've actually never gone to the template's page to read it's documentation so this is the first I'm hearing about that. I'm not sure why it's considered bad practice to create a page with only that template as it's surely an easier way to encourage editors who may not know how to create a talk page to begin discussions or raise concerns about an article. But then again nothing ever seems to sense around here anymore. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. Gloss • talk 21:08, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I kind of agree with you, but it seems not to be the practice, and I tend to try and follow consensus. I poked into the archive of the templates talk page and found some discussion at Template talk:Talk header/Archive 6. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 21:25, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Josh Hutcherson

Hello! Your submission of Josh Hutcherson at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:35, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Hutcherson

I'm unfamiliar with the source in general, but the one you use to support this looks just like a WP bio. I wonder how and by whom it was written. Regards, -- Ohc ^¡digame! 01:51, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

I actually found a better source with some more information. I'll be adding it shortly. Gloss • talk 01:57, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good! -- Ohc ^¡digame! 02:14, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Justin Bieber RfC

If you have time and the desire to re-engage in the debate over legal issues and polls at the Justin Bieber article ....pls comment at Talk:Justin Bieber#RfC: Behaviour and legal issues Thank you for your time. -- Moxy (talk) 04:05, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

3RR

Go ahead, you violated the 3RR before I did. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 07:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Josh Hutcherson

The DYK project (nominate) 14:17, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Hoffman

Yes, it's better quality and more recent, but there's something about his pained expression in it which upsets me which was the reason why I removed it....♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:13, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: I'm sorry, what? Gloss • talk 18:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Seems it was @Corvoe: who switched the photo back in the Philip Seymour Hoffman article not you. I agree it's better for the time being, I hope to replace it with a better one if I can though..♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:21, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm gonna have to echo Gloss. You said it's more recent and better quality, so why would we not use it? His expression isn't the most flattering, but look at Brad Pitt's picture. It's the best one we have. Corvoe (speak to me) 20:40, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Just for the record.. I didn't have an opinion on this, my "I'm sorry, what?" was my confusion about what Dr. Blofeld was talking about in the first place. Gloss • talk 21:54, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

I knew that, I was just thinking it was an appropriate response. Corvoe (speak to me) 03:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

The Following

"Undid revision 594898735 by Artmanha (talk) no, my friend. you're reverting based on your own dislike of the color, not based off of any actual policy or manual of style requirement"

And what is the reason why your reverting the colors, because by the way I see, it is the same one you claimed I had. So, why don't you stop trying to rule the page because you don't. Yes, you can contribute to the page, but you're not the only one who can do it.

Those colors you are trying to put are there simply because you disliked the other ones and they're "not based off of any actual policy or manual of style requirement". You're not in the position to say this to me.

You're more than welcome to contribute to the page by bringing actual referenced information. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artmanha (talk • contribs) 23:37, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Why don't we come back to the colors it originally was, and then you get a WP:CONSENSUS on the talk page instead of me, since it's you who are trying to change the colors and I'm the one trying to revert it. This way is more coherent to what you're trying to do.

I appreciate your comprehension. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artmanha (talk • contribs) 00:11, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

OK then, but those colors do not fit well together. If the problem was this, you should have told me the first time to avoid moments like this.

Later, if you don't figure out other colors that fit better together, I'll do it, but for now I have a suggestion: "004225" for Season 1 and "B2BEB5" for Season 2.

By the way, since you are clearly more skilled than me, the page needs separeted Season 1 and 2 sections. - Artmanha (talk) 00:34, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Do watch any TV show other than 'The Following', if so, you probably "follow" its wikipedia page. So, there's a page only to a season rather than just the "episode list". For instance, "American Horror Story" and "Nikita":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Horror_Story:_Murder_House

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Horror_Story:_Asylum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Horror_Story:_Coven

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikita_(season_1)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikita_(season_2)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikita_(season_3)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikita_(season_4)

Thats what I meant. - Artmanha (talk) 00:45, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Gypsy (Lady Gaga song)

Gypsy has been confirmed as Gaga's next single. It was reported on digital spy that Gypsy was the song she was filming a music video for. hadji87

@Hadji87: If it was confirmed as a single, you'll need a reliable source to back that up. Because as of now, it seems there is no evidence besides a music video being made, and that doesn't automatically mean the song becomes a single. Gloss • talk 15:11, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Hoffman-O'Donnell separation sources

Hi Gloss,

I saw that you reverted my revert on the Hoffman article. I think it is completely fine to have a line about his separation from O'Donnell, but I also think that it is extremely important to have reliable sources for anything we add to the personal life/death subsections – especially now that his death is still being investigated and so many people seem to be confused about the purpose of WP and add content from The National Enquirer and other gossip rags. If we allow non-sourced content about his personal life, I fear that the vandalism to the article will just increase as people add speculation and unnecessary detail. Furthermore, I am not entirely sure whether O'Donnell has stated that their relationship had ended, or whether they were simply living apart/taking a break due to Hoffman's drug relapse (I recall reading that she had asked Hoffman to move away as she didn't want their children exposed to his drug use – i.e. separate living arrangements but not necessarily the end of their relationship). I'm not going to revert your revert as I don't want to start an edit war, but if you have time, could you please find a reliable source and possibly rewrite the sentence as well ('actors' –> 'actor's' etc.)? I (and am sure many other editors and readers as well) would be very grateful!

All the best,

TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 01:14, 14 February 2014 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

Pitch Perfect 2

Please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pitch Perfect 2. --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 16:33, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Tarzan

It's per WP:CRYSTAL that it's too early. Rusted AutoParts 18:27, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

It's highly anticipated film, I think it would be better if redirect it to Tarzan in film and other non-print media#Later films, where the information of the film is already existed.--Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 10:05, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Cagayan

Hey, sorry about that. I just didn't understand your previous edit summary about it not being an official episode. I mean, is it really a problem to have an episode chart this early? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 21:01, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

It's not a problem to have an episode chart.. but there wasn't one. That was the season summary chart, not the episode list/table (which is really where that episode's listing belongs). Being that there were no challenges/eliminations in it, it's not too necessary to have it in there. I've been considering removing recap episodes from the season summary tables for the same reason. It isn't exactly notable in terms of summarizing the season. Gloss • talk 21:03, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, I'd probably leave the recap episodes in the season summary tables because they were still official episodes. Besides, if u remove them, then the episode numbers are confusing. For example, in the Survivor: Gabon article, if u remove the recap episode from the chart, it would skip from episode 9 to episode 11, which would probably confuse even hardcore fans of the show. So I think those are probably best the way they are. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 21:15, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not referring to the episode table that I'd like to remove it from. I'm referring to the season summary table. There aren't episode numbers in that table. I feel like that table is more geared towards the "what happened" "who won the challenge" "who was voted out" and when nothing notable happens in a recap episode, it's not really needed in that particular "summary" table. Gloss • talk 21:22, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

OIC what you're saying. Yeah, I don't see any problem with doing that. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 21:34, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon

You are invited to join upcoming Wikipedia "Editathons", where both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on a selected theme, on the following two Saturdays in March: Saturday March 1: Harlem History Editathon (RSVP), focusing on Harlem history, landmarks and biographies Saturday March 8: NYU Law Editathon (RSVP), focusing on innovation law and intellectual property (with social dinner afterward) I hope to see you there! Pharos (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Disambiguation link notification for February 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gabourey Sidibe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Voodoo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Survivor winner

Didn't Tyson win the top prize last season? NintendoFan (Talk, Contribs) 08:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, he did. It's never referred to as "the Jackpot" in Survivor though... Gloss • talk 13:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1‎

What is your opinion on the Plot section? Should it be there or not. I can't believe experienced editors are ok with having an unreferenced plot section for a movie that has not been released. It would seem to fall under WP:CRYSTAL, since we aren't sure what the plot will really be. Until it's released, it's only speculation.--Asher196 (talk) 16:46, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

@Asher196: I believe it makes sense to have it there because it is a film adaption of a book and the statement given is a very general summary of what happens in the book, without going into any specifics. However I see your point too. Perhaps a discussion on the talk page would be best. Gloss • talk 16:48, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Another quick question about the Hantz article

Hi! I know I already asked u about the Russell Hantz article a few weeks back, but I've made a few more significant changes to it and just wanted a second opinion again before restoring it. I've shortened the Samoa and Heroes vs Villains sections about as much as I can and I've expanded a few other sections and cleaned up some citations. U got any more suggestions? (I wouldn't normally be asking about this stuff so much, but I just wanna be sure I can restore it without it being removed again). Thanks! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 05:08, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: I don't think you should have any problems with it being deleted again. Feel free to put it into the actual article whenever you're ready. Once it's there I'll make some fixes to it :) Gloss • talk 05:16, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Russell Hantz

Those crazy people just don't get it. Now the article's got another user fighting it! I don't get it, half the articles we deleted were kept even with little notability. This article's got plenty of notability, but everybody keeps fighting to delete it. It's almost like half the users here are just stubborn and don't have any sense. I don't know how I'm gonna deal with this trash this time. I hope u can help. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 09:02, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Nope, I'm wrong. Now it's three users! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 09:04, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Don't stress yourself over this, please! People on here love to see another editor go crazy, so don't let them get to you. Gloss • talk 19:16, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Re:Hey there

If you are who I think you are, then you're upset about the U.S. of A. going 0-2 against Canada and that a certain New York Islanders forward was injured. I'm not really back, I'm just slightly active because of the Olympics. I pop up now and then to get into arguments over silly things and realize how happy I am that I don't have to regularly deal with stuff like that any more. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:05, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Yep, I'm involved in a real doozy right now with a bipolar IP who doesn't get it. First he insults me, then he thanks me, then he just goes back to his silly version any way. In the old days I would have just gone to IRC and gotten him blocked and the article locked. But this way is kind of fun. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Survivor Contestants

I've noticed you've unredirected (I don't care if that's not a real word) several articles, including Tyson, Sue, Sandra, and Earl. Is there a reason why you changed your mind? They really aren't notable outside of Survivor (except Earl... I guess!) Dobbyelf62 (talk) 00:06, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

@Dobbyelf62: When I took a closer look into how things work on other reality shows, I noticed that almost every other show provides an article for the winners and then the runner up and other notable contestants on the seasons often grab article space as well. So first and foremost, I figure if we can't have an article on the winner of every season, we're only hurting ourselves and taking WP:BLP1E too seriously.

BLP1E seems to be a little less drastic than we originally took it for. 1E seems to be more geared toward news incidents that are one event... receive media coverage for a week... and then vanish into the new archives. But a reality show as big as Survivor that receives the media coverage it does, going on 14 years and 28 seasons now... it's very easy to argue that at least the winners of every season deserve their own article.

Apparently, American Idol contestants all become notable enough for an article just for making the top 13 of their season. If that's the case, then we can definitely be a little more lenient with who we have redirected because of BLP1E. The general notability guidelines state that significant media coverage for an individual constitutes notability. Gloss • talk 00:41, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

I see. We just can't be too flexible; the contestants need to be noteworthy to have their own page. "You can't be just an average Ringo to have a Wikipedia page, you have to earn it." (Dobbyelf62) Dobbyelf62 (talk) 01:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Uh, did you just quote yourself? :P I agree though, but I've been taking it one person at a time. If you disagree with any, please feel free to bring them to my attention! Gloss • talk 01:18, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Sounds alright. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 15:57, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: I'd recommend you read what I wrote in this section, please. Gloss • talk 01:28, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

These are good points. But I've got mixed feelings about every winner having their own article. On one hand, you're right that winning a TV show as popular as Survivor probably makes one at least somewhat notable (at least more so than some other game show winners). But on the other hand, not all of the winners have significant coverage about their lives beyond Survivor. I mean, Tom Westman doesn't exactly seem to have much coverage of his life beyond Survivor, like Richard Hatch or Rob and Amber. So the result is thus an article with mostly the same info as is in the Palau and Heroes vs. Villains articles. Just in this article, Westman talks about how he doesn't wanna pursue anymore fame beyond Survivor. So to me WP:BLP1E still does apply here: sources only cover Westman in the context of Survivor, his role within Survivor wasn't exactly very substantial, and his life beyond that is not well documented in multiple reliable sources. But of course, that's just me, and I'm definitely willing to change my mind. I'd be happy to discuss it further if u want. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 01:50, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps it's best we go along with this AfD to see how others feel about it. But after Todd's AfD and a few other winners' AfDs, if this one is kept, it's likely safe to say that all winners are notable enough for inclusion. Gloss • talk 01:53, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Okay, that sounds good. I don't have any intentions on nominating any more articles. Although if u really think every winner should have their own article, should Natalie White have her own article? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 01:57, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

For winning her season, I believe so. Gloss • talk 02:00, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Template:Morgan Freeman sidebar

Hi there! I just removed the TfD template from Template:Morgan Freeman sidebar, which you added, because the template doesn't appear to be under discussion at February 17's log. It looks like you made a bulk nomination of a bunch of sidebars like this at TfD, but you didn't include Morgan Freeman with that nomination. Just to let you know. Regards, Mz7 (talk) 17:08, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

@Mz7: Thanks for the heads up. I actually ended up nominating a bunch of those sidebars for deletion but combined all the nominations here. So that one is being considered for deletion, still. Gloss • talk 17:38, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Degrassi

Is it really necessary force these to be relisted at AfD for three weeks straight just get to the same outcome? Participation in fiction related AfDs had gone down recently, so it takes a good while to actually get anywhere. Another likely possibility would just end up being the closing admin saying to use normally merging procedures, which would lead us right back to here anyway. These characters are not ones that have received significant coverage as far as I've been able to tell, and they have plenty of detail on the character list. It would be one thing if you were objecting based on believing in the possibility for potential improvement, but you seem to be objecting solely based on the process instead. In that case, could you please just let them be redirected until another person objects? TTN (talk) 02:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

@TTN: I'm not objecting based on the process, I disagree with the merging itself. I'm sorry for the hassle but I don't see why those articles should be merged. They're not written very well but they shouldn't be merged because of poor writing. Gloss • talk 02:10, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Do you have some sort of idea as how they can conform to WP:N? I looked up sources for a random assortment of them, but none turned up anything substantial. Caitlin Ryan was the only one with any real world information in the first place, but that isn't really enough to count towards anything. It's one thing to think that they should deserve articles and another for them to actually deserve articles. TTN (talk) 02:19, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Right, but there is a chance I'm not the only one who thinks they deserve articles, which is what the AfD will help with. If consensus is that they don't, then so be it. And I can look for sources and what not (don't have time right now) but my personal ability to find sources or not shouldn't affect whether or not the articles are kept as they are or taken to AfD. Gloss • talk 02:23, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

If you believe the possibility exists but aren't completely sure, can't we just compromise with redirects? That leaves the history there, and it allows for anyone interested with the proper resources to reestablish them later. It would be one thing if they were more active, but they all have had barely ten edits in the last three years (as I imagine most interested parties migrated to Wikia). I don't see AfDs doing anything to drum up support to improve them. It will just be the scant inclusionist voting keep simply because "all major characters deserve articles" and anyone else voting to redirect because there is no particular reason that they need to be deleted in lieu of a redirect. It's just an unnecessary, drawn-out process that will lead in a giant circle or nowhere in the end. TTN (talk) 02:34, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

I really can't bring myself to agree to the redirects. I agree with the "all major characters deserve articles" argument. Gloss • talk 06:14, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Survivor template

Hi! I'm still not so sure about the Survivor template as it is. I mean Panama, Cook Islands, and Fiji are now completely absent from it and there's a lot of wasted space. Are u absolutely sure this way's better? Survivorfan1995 (talk) 05:40, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

I'll go take a look now if I left those out. I didn't mean to, of course. And I personally do think so because it allows a lot more room to work with for future seasons. The other way, we would've needed to add another row by next season, likely and it was already ridiculously long as it was. Gloss • talk 06:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Portal links

Do u really think those aren't necessary? I was the one who added all those in the first place because I thought they were kinda like adding categoies. If u think they're not necessary, I can go and remove all of em right now. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 21:15, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

@Survivorfan1995: They're not really necessary. If you look at most BLP's, they aren't there. Gloss • talk 21:16, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Alright, I think I got 'em all. Thanks! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 21:29, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good, appreciate it :) Gloss • talk 21:31, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Didn't want you to be left out ;) Vjmlhds 22:08, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

List of WWE personnel

I'm assuming good faith with your actions at this page and assuming you walked away from it because you realised you were edit warring. I'd like to remind you that you don't have to do more than 3 reverts in 24 hours to be guilty of edit warring - that's just a bright red line which makes it pretty clear you're edit warring. Anyway I've just blocked three editors for edit warring on that page. I suggest you don't try and take advantage of their blocks unless you also wish to find yourself blocked. That probably comes across a bit harsher than I mean it to but I wanted to be fair and spell out the possible consequences if you did continue even though I believe you probably won't. Dpmuk (talk) 01:37, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

@Dpmuk: Fair enough, thanks for the note. Gloss • talk 02:32, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, we can name an article a Good Article or a Featured Article, so why not something for the opposite end of the spectrum? Vjmlhds (talk) 17:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

@Vjmlhds: Those are recognized class levels on Wikipedia, not awards. They go through months of hard work and processes to become GA/FAs. Barnstars and other awards are meant for other users, not articles. You've been on Wikipedia for years, I didn't think I'd have to actually remind you that a talk page is not a forum and is strictly meant for discussion about an article. Come on, please find something more productive to do than putting an award on an article's talk page. Gloss • talk 18:06, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Sometimes statements need to be made. Now that it was made, I made a proposal to (hopefully) put an end to all the conflicts by essentially removing the tumor that made the article so toxic to start with. Take a gander if you like and put in your $0.02. Vjmlhds (talk) 23:03, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the invitation but I no longer wish to be involved, and I'll leave it at that. Gloss • talk 23:08, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Discussion about eliminating or keeping Category:Hispanic and Latino American women in television

You are invited to join the discussion at WP:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 February 26#Category:Hispanic and Latino American women in television. Peaceray (talk) 05:53, 28 February 2014 (UTC) Peaceray (talk) 05:53, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

More on Survivor template

As you can tell, the Survivor template is becoming more and more bulky. With more seasons means more contestants. In other words, the template will only get bigger. I propose we eliminate every all star season (Survivor: All Stars, Survivor: Heroes vs. Villains etc). This way, the template will be less overwhelming for a reader. Your thoughts?

BTW, what are your thoughts on this season so far? Dobbyelf62 (talk) 20:20, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

@Dobbyelf62: It doesn't come across as a big problem to me. Those were two huge seasons for the show, so removing them wouldn't really benefit us much. I personally think it's fine for now. About the season, I'm loving it so far! Gloss • talk 21:53, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Mike Halmo

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:47, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Survivor Total Votes

Why not consider the total votes?, It is relevant to statistical information. It also reveals that player got more votes during the season and also winners who had no vote. eg Sandra in Pearl Island

Please don't delete my comments

as you did here. Thank you. JMHamo (talk) 23:26, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

@JMHamo: Didn't do that, page must've glitched. Gloss • talk 23:29, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

I have never encountered that 'glitch' before, but I will AGF. JMHamo (talk) 23:31, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

@JMHamo: I'd recommend in the future you assume good faith first that there was an edit conflict issue or a page glitch, which are both very common at those noticeboards, and simply re-add your comments. In the mean time, I'll grab some diffs of this glitch for you, so you're more aware in the future. Gloss • talk 23:33, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Take it to WP:VPT if you think there's a system issue then. JMHamo (talk) 23:36, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

@JMHamo: I instead found a diff of an editor adding a note to the AN/ANI header about the glitch. See here. Happens to both AN and ANI every once in a while, and also is not a cause for alarm. Gloss • talk 23:38, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

OK, thanks. P.S. I am not alarmed but think there could be more Admins around doing stuff JMHamo (talk) 23:43, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

New York Islanders' Alternate Captains

The Islanders' website is notarious for not updating it's roster. For the 2008-2009 season, I recalled that Mike Sillinger was named as an Alternate Captain, but was injured. Doug Weight and Richard Park were alternating while he was out. After Sillinger's return, the site never listed Sillinger nor Park with an A eventhough Silly, Park and Weight were alternating. I had to prove that this was in fact the case with the NHL game sheets. I did not list the replacement alternates in the current NHL captains and alternates page (which is not supposed to list temporary alternates). Thank you Raul17 (talk) 03:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

@Raul17: Glad to see you do talk... you never responded after that barnstar I sent your way. (ouch).. but I do see both sides to this. The Islanders roster is our official source, and while someone may be wearing the A... does that make them an official alternate captain if the official team website doesn't acknowledge it? If there is an NHL source to back it up outside of the Islanders' roster, then it would be fine I suppose. Gloss • talk 03:37, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I am so sorry! Real life time don't give me enough time to acknowledge. Very sorry and thank you!! I don't think I do half as much as the other editors do and they deserve it more than I!! I do need to learn how to make one so I can hand them out! Before Andy Mac's trade, I believe that Visnovsky & Nielsen were going to alternate in place of Tavares, but now I see Hamonic wore an A with Nielsen on the road. I will wait for a few more games. If the team does annouce the replacement alternates, would that be enough for the current NHL captains and alternates page? Thank you again! Raul17 (talk) 04:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

@Raul17: No worries, only messing with you :P and yes, that sounds fair. Thanks for discussing it with me! Gloss • talk 04:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I did find an announcement here, that Hamonic has been announced as an alternate captain. We need to wait for an announcement if Nielsen is one. 173.51.123.97 (talk) 05:50, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the source. Gloss • talk 12:08, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

The Islanders website now lists Nielsen as well. 173.51.123.97 (talk) 04:38, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

I see, thanks for making the updates! Gloss • talk 04:39, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Explanation of removal

Hi Gloss,

I noticed you restored my removal of the "Hispanic and Latino American women in television" category from pages and thought I should explain further. When categories have been nominated for deletion, I've often seen a bot remove them from the pages that include them. This could be a fault of the bot, though, so I'll leave them for now. That is all.

XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 04:31, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

@XXSNUGGUMSXX: No problem. If the bot is removing a category and the deletion or merger discussion has not been finished it's likely an error, and leaving the bot's owner a message would be helpful. It's the same thing with those links on the Katy Perry book. Links to articles or templates or pictures or categories, etc should not be removed if there is a deletion discussion going on still about it. Thanks for explaining, though! Gloss • talk 04:39, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Sure thing! XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 04:43, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Gloss. You have new messages at User talk:Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard.
Message added 13:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Fly Away (The Following)

Orlady (talk) 08:03, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Catching Fire

Thanks for catching my first oops on the catching fire. I had cut Prim to move it to order it as billed in the film then pressed save instead of preview, you undid it before I had fixed the cast list (which made another error). I think it is all fixed now. Thank you also for removing the citations from the cast. I did not know if there was a reason for them being there now that the film was released.AbramTerger (talk) 23:59, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

@AbramTerger: Sorry, didn't know you accidentally removed that. And yeah no problem, I agree that they weren't needed anymore. Gloss • talk 00:02, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

I understand why, there are many vandalizers on the boards. As I watch DVDs and old films I have been trying to clean and update pages while I have the primary source of the film there to check the details. Take care.AbramTerger (talk) 00:07, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Survivor: Cagayan

I noticed this revert [3]. Preview that just aired on CBS indicates that the swap will take place in Episode 4. All Survivor Wikipedia precedent says we can update the contestants list in advanced. Here is one recent discussion on the matter Talk:Survivor:_One_World/Archive_1. I am reverting your revert. Please do not repeat it and start an edit war. Thanks! Thegreyanomaly (talk) 01:15, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

@Thegreyanomaly: I will revert your edit again as you're not right here! It's a complete guess and violating WP:CRYSTAL to place that column there. Just because Jeff Probst said "drop your buffs" does not mean a tribe swap. You're assuming that. We're likely all assuming that but it was never directly said and we have no sources confirming this. Therefore the edits violate our verifiability policy. It's also against table guidelines to have an empty column in a table. So I will revert if you revert again as I've just cited policies this edit violates and your only basis for reverting is "it's been done like that before." Gloss • talk 01:18, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

That discussion about One World also was based on a video where the players' new tribe buffs were shown. The column for switched tribes was not left empty on the One World article and should not be left empty here. Gloss • talk 01:20, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

They do not violate WP:Crystal Ball. See last season's talk page Talk:Survivor:_Blood_vs._Water and Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_111#Proposed_amendment_to_WP:SPOILERS. Jeff's previews are reliable sources. Furthermore he also said, Brains Beauties and Brawn are no more. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 01:24, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

@Thegreyanomaly: First of all, that doesn't mean anything. Maybe he's dropping the names "Brains" "Beauty" and "Brawn". Maybe he's changing buff colors. It's all obvious to a fan but otherwise speculation because it cannot be verified. And again I bring up, an empty column in a table is not welcomed if avoidable, which it easily is here. This can easily wait until next week. Gloss • talk 01:26, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

You are violating WP:SPOILERS. I am sorry, but there is no ambiguity. Never has Jeff said drop your buffs and there has not been a tribal swap or merge. It is all in your head. I am going to do the proper thing and take this to the talk page and another user. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 01:31, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

I completely agree that there will be a swap next week, but that's because I'm a fan. There has been no official announcement that it will happen though, he hasn't said "there will be a tribe mix up". You're violating WP:V. This isn't a spoiler.. it's unconfirmed speculation based on a preview. Gloss • talk 01:36, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

We have used this much evidence before, and admin's (who probably have better grasps of policy that standard users) have seconded it. CBS's previews are considered reliable sources and are verifiable. Just so you know as soon as I see CBS post a picture or video of someone clearly in an opposite tribe (e.g., a Brain and a Brawn with the same buff), I will cite and revert you. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 01:40, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

An administrator is somebody with extra tools on this website, not an almighty person who's opinion carries any more weight. The fact that an admin has seconded your opinion is irrelevant. What don't you understand about the fact that the current CBS preview does NOT contain information CONFIRMING a tribe swap..? You keep saying the same thing over and over again. And as soon as you see CBS post something like that, throw up a source and I'll gladly revert myself. But by saying that, you basically admit that it's currently unsourced, so thank you. The information can be added in prose form once it can be confirmed by a reliable source. Gloss • talk 01:45, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Revert and risk violating the 3RR, be my guest. More than just a single admin, consensus has tolerated empty cells ([4], here is one example). See the village pump discussion linked above. A Survivor preview is reliable and verifiable, and using a preview to layout a tribal swap is not violation of any policy. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 01:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

What I meant was that if you provide a source, I'll gladly revert my own edits and put the information back in the article myself. But right now, you have no source. A preview is reliable and verifiable if it contains the information you're citing. That preview doesn't directly verify the information you're trying to cite. Gloss • talk 01:54, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

That is just your opinion, other users have gone with that much information and have had been fine with blank Swapped Tribe and Merged Tribe columns. I do not know if this is your first time editing a Survivor season page as it airs, but generally from my experience users are fine with empty swapped tribe and empty merged tribe columns, and have been fine to go on as little as "Drop your buffs" and "X and Y [and Z] are no more". Also, just because the source is not on the net yet, does not mean it is invalid, just hard to cite. The whole episode is not on the net yet, but that does not mean it is not a source Thegreyanomaly (talk) 02:00, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't care, nor does Wikipedia that "other editors have been fine with it". Wikipedia has core verifiability policies we need to abide by. You keep repeating yourself and it's getting tiresome. We can keep this on the talk page of the article now. Gloss • talk 02:09, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013–14 New York Islanders season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Hickey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Pitch Perfect 2

But it's still not filming, therefore it fails NFF. This wasnt in relation to the AFD. Rusted AutoParts 23:29, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

@Rusted AutoParts: Regardless, the AfD was closed under a month ago as keep. Gloss • talk 23:42, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 15 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the 2013–14 New York Islanders season page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 11:52, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Survivor

Quick message, might not matter, but I think that the line separating the info from the votes (I have to thank you for doing that, I've been doing that on my Survivor spreadsheets for quite some time. what survivor spreadsheets) would be better if it's black rather than dark grey. Also, I enjoy the inclusion of the day section but maybe it'd look a little better if the episode #s were marked with an ! rather than a |? Do as you please, enjoy your day. ~ Totaldramaman ^{(talk · contribs)} 03:42, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

@Totaldramaman: I like the black! I'll have to make that switch soon, I appreciate the feedback as well :) and I'm not sure how I'd feel about the episode #s, is there a reason? My only concern is because the episode number isn't exactly the most significant part of the column. The ! is usually just used for a column or row header. Gloss • talk 03:45, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 18 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Fly Away (The Following) page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:27, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Something to Remember

Gloss, may I tempt you in reviewing the above Madonna article for GA? —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 13:54, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

@IndianBio: This go around, I'll unfortunately have to decline. Real life has kept me busy lately and I've just been popping in and out, so I'm not particularly looking to commit to anything (like a review) right now. I'm very sorry, and I hope it gets reviewed soon! Gloss • talk 14:13, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Oh that's absolutely fine dear. Hope your real life gets sorted and we get you back here regularly again :) —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 14:17, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Haha, I wouldn't count on it.. unfortunately my editing pattern may only get worse from here, due to work, but I'll be around as much as possible on my days off (like today, phew!) Gloss • talk 14:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

I am reviewing it now. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 19:06, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Survivor: Cagayan

I'm a little confused as to why my edit was undone. My edit fixed the capitalization on the phrase "Voted Out". If you look at all the past Survivor pages, both Voted and Out are capitalized. The way it is now, looks really sloppy and unprofessional. I think my edit should be reinstated as it makes the overall look better and less sloppy. GTAdkins (talk) 20:06, 27 March 2014 (UTC)GTAdkins

#Survivor revisited

Just wondering if I should implement the changes we talked about here in the Cagayan page. ~ Totaldramaman ^{(talk · contribs)} 00:46, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

@Totaldramaman: Yes absolutely, if you'd like! I'm sure I would have got to it eventually, but if you're willing and able to get on it now, please do :) Gloss • talk 03:58, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I posted this in the article's talk page. Hopefully before the logo gets tagged, can someone capture the BvsBvsB logo and change the background to white? Steelbeard1 (talk) 22:17, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

You're the only one who thinks it should be changed, so you're welcome to try doing that.. Gloss • talk 22:20, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

The problem is I am not skilled at editing graphics so I am hoping someone else who has the skills with JPG editing software can white out the background so it can be utilized in a Wikipedia article. Steelbeard1 (talk) 00:01, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

File question

Hi Gloss,

I wanted to say thanks for getting this photo for the Lady Gaga Live at Roseland Ballroom. One thing I'm just curious of is this: did you by any chance manage to capture a shot where the front of Gaga's face could be more clearly seen? If so, I would recommend uploading that.

XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 00:07, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Of course if I find one better I'll upload it. But we can't really be picky here, a cruddy camera phone's camera can only capture so much! Gloss • talk 02:36, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I know the feel, bro. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 04:13, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I did find one, though. Gloss • talk 04:29, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I noticed that :). If you don't mind, I'm gonna just have that one stay in the article. Kudos for being able to get shots at what I'm sure was quite a crowded event! Which night(s) did you attend? XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 04:55, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Gloss I have a question. Which camera phone are you using? Would you have the original resolution of the images? I'm asking because I want to update the Metadata of the images in the commons. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 06:32, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I went Wednesday night (April 2nd) and I think both can find a good spot in the article XX, it's a decent sized article, so two images wouldn't hurt at all. IB-An iPhone 4, and I don't think I have that. Gloss • talk 12:55, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Gloss, what I meant was that would you upload the higher resolution of the images if possible? I thought iphone 4 took pics in high-res? —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 15:21, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I've been able to take high-res pics with iPhone 4. Gloss, my guess is that you couldn't take high-res due to distance/zoom or something. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 15:47, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

The lights at a concert just mess with it. Gloss • talk 21:39, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes indeed they do. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 23:06, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Survivor: Cagayan redux

Totaldramaman is continuing to revert the BvsBvsB logo in the version you like despite the fact that it's being used in the Ponderosa videos and he did not explain his reason despite the new evidence. Steelbeard1 (talk) 12:56, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Totaldramaman reverted yet again WITHOUT EXPLAINING WHY. I don't want to get into an edit war with him, so can you help out? Steelbeard1 (talk) 15:46, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

It isn't the version "I like" - the image you provided isn't a good enough quality logo. Gloss • talk 01:19, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Survivor voting tables, past seasons

Hey there Gloss! I'm writing to you to inquire about how voting tables have been setup for seasons where they are large enough to disrupt the margin on the side of the page. I understand breaking the single voting table into two prevents this and I like that the margin isn't messed with in this situation. However, in my opinion, I think the empty space it leaves on the right side of the page is too large and that we should consider turning it back into one table. If you look at the South Pacific and Philippines pages, I have merged them back into one table but reduced the text size to make it fit without messing up the margin. I'd appreciate any feedback you have on it and if you think we could do this for other seasons. Thanks! BlueDevil54 (talk) 21:28, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

@BlueDevil54: The split is helpful on iPhones and tablets and smaller computers, which are more commonly used than regular computers here in 2014. The tables still go far off the page for Philippines and South Pacific when I use Google Chrome. Gloss • talk 01:21, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Awards and honors

The reason was to give credit to the players who received all-star honors. PensRule11385 • talk 19:22, 15 April 2014 (CST)

Oh, those are for references, I'll remove them when they're unused.