User talk:Jbt1138

Welcome!

Hello, Jbt1138, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Alientraveller 16:57, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spoilers

While it's wonderful that you are enthusiastic, your edits to the John Black page are constituted as spoilers and, as such, need to wait. Just because you have seen the show, doesn't mean others have and your edits did ruin it for some people. IrishLass0128 20:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John Black page

Your recap of John's death was the best. I put it back in since the show has aired in all markets by now. Nice recap of their final scene.-CelticGreen 22:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well done

Hey there, just wanted to compliment your recent edits to some One Life to Live pages. I monitor many of them, and unfortunately most additions seem to be made by editors with little grasp of grammar and who can't even capitalize people's names, LOL. Your writing is great, concise yet complete. If you have time you should consider joining WP:SOAPS or at least jumping into the soap articles more; I'm always looking for people who actually know what they're doing! Thanks again. — TAnthony^Talk 18:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks; I'm just easily amused, I guess. I'll consider checking that group out! You do a great job; I hope you don't consider me ungrateful for thinking there ought to be some new or slightly different pix in the Marty Saybrooke and Tina Lord entries.--Jbt1138 (talk) 12:53, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all, I actually agree but the opening credit screen caps are just the most readily available and best quality, despite the "see through" effect in the 1980s ones. I never have time to search! The Tina article is one I've been meaning to expand anyway; I have some other images but most are on the grainy side (captured from VHS, no doubt). I actually put the SOD cover in for just rthat reason, to show her a little more clearly. The screen capture vs. publicity photo thing has been a huge issue in the past; some articles have publicity stills, but they are always in danger of deletion. By all means, if you come across any photos, I can help you upload them and put in the fair use info, or do it for you. — TAnthony^Talk 17:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Todd Manning article and the Téa Delgado article

In your edit summary of changing a part in the Todd Manning article, you stated that Gary Tomlin's writing team wrote the Teenagers Manhandled scripts, not Ron Carlivati. The thing is, though, we cannot put that without a valid reference. The valid reference I have states Carlivati having made that decision. Even if his team did not write it during the 2008 WGA writer's strike, that does not mean that he did not advise Tomlin's team on what to write. It should be taken more as Carlivati was in charge, you know, since he was still head writer of the series at the time.

And as for Florencia Lozano coming back as Téa Delgado, we need a valid reference for stating that as well. If Soap Opera Weekly is reporting that, you need to attribute the reference to that, along with the date of the issue, etc. I mean, did you read that in this magazine yourself or just hear it? Flyer22 (talk) 18:36, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I can dig up the article I will, and I agree it should be cited, but there was a very well-publicized interview with Carlivati in the soap rags in which he discusses how his scripts ended in early February and didn't resume until the very end of April or early May, and discusses his frustration with a number of the storylines written by the "scab" writers. He is very specific about the fact that the Starr pregnancy and Starr/Cole sex storyline was not created by him. There was a lot of hype about how his scripts were resuming in late April-early May, long after the scenes with Todd beating on the teens aired. And while Nelson Branco, who wrote the column you cited, has some inside connections, he is also extremely unreliable and often inaccurate. At the time he was very pro-Carlivati, and often praised him without letting facts - like the fact that Tomlin was running the show during those months - get in the way. We can cite him, but IMO we do so at our peril. Months later, for example, when Carlivati's return was being hyped by the magazines, Branco followed suit and attacked Tomlin for "ruining the show" in Carlivati's absence and did not call back to the fact that he had written a column claiming RC was writing it in March.

The SOW issue comes out this week (9/8/08) and has been verified by multiple people with advance copies. I'd be happy to help cite it when it is publicly available. FL's return is advertised on the cover.Jbt1138 (talk) 20:49, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining. And, yes, I have heard how Branco is sometimes wrong. Hmm, regarding this Todd Manning matter mentioned above, we should probably state According to Nelson Branco of TV Guide. That way we are not stating as fact that Carlivati was behind the writing at that time. And, then, if you can get a hold of the issue where Carlivati is stating his frustration with a number of the storylines written by the "scab" writers during his absence at that time, we will include that as well.

Since you gave the date for the Soap Opera Weekly issue reporting Lozano's return, we can now attribute that to a reference. We still do not have the title of that article, but if it had just been the title, it would be fine as well. We would have just stated the title and the month/year it was reported. I just wanted one or the other, or both. When it's finally out, we can add the title as well. And, yes, your helping with that will be much appreciated. Flyer22 (talk) 21:14, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You stated 9/8/08. But it's already September 10th. So isn't that issue out by now? Flyer22 (talk) 21:53, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I was just referencing it by the beginning of the week it was to be out, not the actual release date. I assume they come out today or tomorrow as usual.Jbt1138 (talk) 04:25, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. And if you haven't already noticed, I did the alernative instance I mentioned above for the Todd Manning article. Flyer22 (talk) 21:52, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]