User talk:MrSchimpf/Archive/Archive 32

Archive 25

←

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

Suggestion

Hello, MrSchimpf! You might be interested in endorsing an essay in which creation I participated – WP:NOCONFED. Of course, this is just a suggestion, nothing more. Cheers! — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 23:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Debate to delete a Category

You have been Notified because you were once involved in a similar discussion involving Founding Fathers.
There is a debate over whether to keep Category: Homes of United States Founding Fathers as a category. More opinions are needed. The discussion is located Here -- Gwillhickers (talk)

Concerning the TVS brand in an article for the Silver Nugget casino & arena...

As per your suggestion of ignoring the history of the TVS Television Network post-2000, I recently went through & removed a lot of references to the TVS Television Network, Margate Entertainment, & even Margate's head, Tom Ficara, from various articles. However, for Silver Nugget, there is a sourced reference to TVS, specifically TVSBoxing.net, in an article from CasinoCityTimes.com:[1], dated 2008. I tried removing the statement & the reference, but users @Bharel: & @C.Fred: insist on both the statement & the website article referenced being placed in the article. I wasn't sure how to handle the situation, so I figured to let you know, so that you can help resolve it. 2600:1700:C960:2270:1457:6B6F:7843:BD14 (talk) 04:00, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Revert on Vídeo Brinquedo

I noticed that you reverted my edit on Vídeo Brinquedo. I deleted these claims because they were bold but unsourced. I believe WP:BURDEN applies here when the edits were reverted. Can you provide sources for the claims that were restored? Thanks, Carpimaps (talk) 12:40, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Response

The main reason I removed the information in the article was that it was unsourced, not because it was false or violates NPOV. While there is no reason to doubt you, WP:BURDEN applies here and you need to replace the tags with a citation before you revert the edit. Even it is "known from the beginning", it should be verifiable per WP:TRUTH. Thanks, Carpimaps (talk) 01:52, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Teletoon and Cartoon Network Canada

I'd like to invite you to the Teletoon talk page later today so we can have a community consensus on the matter of whether to merge branding or create a new article, since it clearly needs discussion. We can also present citations for a case as well. GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 21:02, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Million Dollar Extreme

What's the source for Carroll being a former member? [2]? I don't see anything about that in the Deadline link or other references. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

I would like to add that as per WP:ABOUTSELF, Charls himself has made clear via his Twitter (having retweeted this and this) and YouTube (here) that he is a current member. He has been seen in multiple photographs on set with various other members filming episodes of World Peace 2. I do not see why this is a contentious issue, especially considering that the claim of former membership was added without any source at all originally. DvcDeBlvngis (talk) 15:50, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Nonsense revert

Who is going to confuse it for "To Be Determined" when its literally in a template that's title is "English-language broadcast television networks in the United States"? [ Redacted for civility purposes and to avoid any misunderstanding, my apologies MrSchimpf ] who doesn't know left from right to not understand that's the actual (official) name of the network. GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 00:54, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

May I also add that when you hover over it on desktop, the redirect says "TBD (TV network)". There's no mistaking it and adding an unofficial "TV" marker isn't going to make any difference to the reader. You are just finding any reason to revert my edit.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 00:57, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@GalaxyFighter55 I am not MrSchimpf but I would like to remind you that WP:CIVIL exists. Carpimaps (talk) 01:40, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Carpimaps I am being civil here.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 01:44, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Any sentence that begins with "You'd have to be a total idiot" and objecting to another editor's reversion is not civil. General Ization ^Talk 01:47, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

That wasn't directed at him, re-read the sentence. I even went back to add the "'d" to avoid any potential misunderstandings.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 01:49, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

The "'d" wouldn't have been effective at avoiding that misunderstanding, and even if it had been you can find less aggressive ways to state your point. E.g., "I believe that readers will understand that that's the actual (official) name of the network." General Ization ^Talk 01:51, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Ok fair enough, I should have found a better way with less strong language to illustrate my point across. Just know that it was never my intention to call him an idiot, it's supposed to demonstrate a third person pov.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 01:56, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Please don't call anyone an idiot. It's stated that way because a common reader may misunderstand, and my intention was to make any reader (especially one who isn't regularly in the TV topic area) understand 'this is the name of a television network, not the status of an unknown network'. We settled this a year ago through consensus. No offense was meant, just a small thing to make that clear to someone who doesn't understand the network's name is intentional. Also, there are readers on the mobile versions of en.wiki (or even text browsers) that can't hover over links, which is another factor in the clarification. Nate • (chatter) 02:04, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh no I definitely wouldn't directly attack anyone here with such language. I suppose I just need to eliminate strong words such as that from my vocabulary at all times when it comes to editing here on Wikipedia, even if it's non-directed, so I'm sorry about that. Regarding this user consensus, may I view it if you remember where it was? I didn't see it in the template talk page.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 02:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Paramount Media Networks

@MrSchimpf I do not want to get into a content war, nor do I intend any disrespect. However, Paramount Media Networks is a division and business segment of Paramount Global which consists of a multitude of U.S. networks which are all connected via the same immediate unit. I understand that you have been a part of this community for almost two decades, and from your user page, I can see that you have a very stern editorial style. However, as a newcomer to Wikipedia, I will say that the list of network links in the infoboxes gives myself and others in the community the ability to easily access information across multiple different networks within one division/company.

Hopefully you can see where I am coming from, and we can come to a mutual understanding. NorthPark1 (talk) 14:26, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

@MrSchimpf In addition, I’ve been removing small letters from infoboxes, so you got it backwards. And I was very respectful to you, so you should not tarnish my talk page due to a difference in editorial style. A reader of the Oxygen article who is genuinely invested in the family of networks actually WOULD care about connection to the Golf Channel, Nickelodeon, etc. If you want me to keep it simple, that’s perfectly fair and valid, and frankly there is no “we don’t give a damn” as there is no “we.” There is only YOUR opinion on this encyclopedia that anyone can edit. When I say that someone could actually want to see the full list of sister channels in the infoboxes, I’m talking about company investors, stockholders, and executives within the company who want all the information to be known. As far as the Nick Jr. article goes, Wikipedia is not a children’s website, and the former is obviously an informational article aimed at adults. So please

do not vandalize my talk page due to a disagreement or editorial conflict, if there’s a problem. Talk. Deal with it properly and how you would in face-to-face communication such as in school or the workplace. NorthPark1 (talk) 09:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Circle

Not trying to argue with you, but since Circle debuted 3 1/2 years ago, they've added more sitcoms, dramas, movies, and reality shows to their schedule, becoming more of a blue collar/rural themed station rather than just a pure music network. Not saying country music isn't a part of it - far from it - but it isn't the whole thing. It's a piece for sure, but at this point just a piece. Vjmlhds (talk) 22:32, 27 June 2023 (UTC)