User talk:YoungForever/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:YoungForever. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Do you watch this one? (I've only gotten part of the way through season #1, and that was a couple of months ago...) Anyway, do you have any idea who actually should be listed in the 'Recurring' cast section? From the looks of the current list, it's including too many people who almost certainly shouldn't be listed... Any idea how many of those listed actually appeared in more than 4 or 5 episodes? --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
- @IJBall:I do watch the web series and am positive that Kerri Medders as Gwenny, Iman Benson as Reagan, Merit Leighton as Hannah, Jack Griffo as Dylan, and Scott Wordham as Barry are recurring. The rest as far as I remember are appear in less than 4 episodes. — YoungForever(talk) 02:39, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's exactly what I thought. There may be a few others, like Ricky Garcia, who may qualify (esp. when including season #2 episodes). But I think more than half of those listed there don't belong... I'll try to take a look at that tomorrow morning. for trimming, if you don't get to it first... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:48, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
- @IJBall: Also, pinging Amaury & Geraldo Perez. An editor is disruptive editing the article. Blatantly, ignoring hidden comments and keep adding guest stars as recurring. — YoungForever(talk) 05:48, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry for disrupting, but there are characters that have appeared in at least four episodes that you incorrectly listed as “guest stars.” Potvin, Smith and Jirrels have appeared in at least for episodes. Thank you! IVictorious101 (talk) 05:53, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- This one has been on my watchlist for a while, so I should catch anything... And, FTR, I think the current 'Guest cast' section should be trimmed – probably just to "notable" guest stars (e.g. those with Wikipedia articles): I'd cut all the rest, as this section is too long/WP:UNDUE. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:19, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- @IJBall: I agree,
the current 'Guest cast' section should be trimmed to "notable" guest stars
only. — YoungForever(talk) 18:45, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- @IJBall: I agree,
- @IJBall: Also, pinging Amaury & Geraldo Perez. An editor is disruptive editing the article. Blatantly, ignoring hidden comments and keep adding guest stars as recurring. — YoungForever(talk) 05:48, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's exactly what I thought. There may be a few others, like Ricky Garcia, who may qualify (esp. when including season #2 episodes). But I think more than half of those listed there don't belong... I'll try to take a look at that tomorrow morning. for trimming, if you don't get to it first... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:48, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
AP Bio
Why did you delete my addition of a few episode descriptions from the AP Bio page? I mean, if you had at least added your own episode descriptions, that would have been fine, but leaving the episode descriptions blank seems strange. --Michaelandersen88 (talk) 03:08, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Michaelandersen88: As I explained in my edit summary WP:COPYVIO. The summaries that you had put in were from another web site. They were not in your own words.— YoungForever(talk) 03:58, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
- These changes were my own words. If you found these somewhere else, show me where you found them. Michaelandersen88 (talk) 07:13, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Michaelandersen88: [1] very close to paraphrasing. In addition, 1-2 sentences aren't much of a summary. — YoungForever(talk) 15:19, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
- These changes were my own words. If you found these somewhere else, show me where you found them. Michaelandersen88 (talk) 07:13, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
She's gotta have... principles.
So... it’s been over 3 weeks and that season section has sat empty. It's "disruptive" to remove an empty table of abstract ideas until someone can easily bring it back and fill with... actual content? What happened to standards? Trillfendi (talk) 00:29, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Trillfendi: I advise to read up MOS:TV. We do not remove an Episode table when there is already enough information such as the episode titles, directors, writers, and release date/airdate, but no episode summaries yet. FYI, episode titles and release date/airdate are enough for an episode table. — YoungForever(talk) 00:37, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Trillfendi: I know YoungForever doesn't need me to stand up for her, but I feel the need to get this out. I saw the edits you made on She's Gotta Have It (TV series). Have you ever even seen an episode table on Wikipedia? You don't have to wait until the episodes air to make a table. Also, at the risk of sounding like a total hypocrite, you don't own the article. — Zuko Halliwell (talk) 15:29, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Disruptive Editing On List of Riverdale Episodes
YoungForever, I'm truly sorry for my disruptive editing on the page List of Riverdale Episodes because I was having difficulty adding to the page which I believe I have figured out. I'am still new to Wikipedia editing and it takes me a bit to understand how to edit a page a specific way. I hope you understand.
Sincerely,
Mitchend17 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitchend17 (talk • contribs) 05:48, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello YoungForever,
Regarding your reverting my edit of Another Life (2019 TV series), you commented "We don't include audience score from Rotten Tomatoes as they are no [sic] from critics." Is there a written policy, rule or something you can reference?
I have read a number of Wikipedia articles on films and TV series that have included the audience score, for example,
You Talkin' to Me? (film); The Eighteenth Angel; Hope (1997 film); Rx (film); Stalled; The Sight (film)
just to name a few.
If there is no established policy requiring the exclusion of RT audience scores, then I believe your reversion was not necessary. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Revert_only_when_necessary) My edit was certainly not vandalism and I do not think it could be described as having made the article worse. I believe it added information that readers might find interesting.
In addition, the sentence I added ("However, the site's audience score is 60% positive based on 1277 user ratings") made it clear that it was an audience score and not a critic score. It also seems to me to be pretty clear that it was meant to point out the contrast between the critic score of 6% and the audience score. I have seen similar things done before. It is relevant information and is in no way confusing.
If there is no hard and fast rule against including audience scores, I would like to see the edit restored.
Regards,
Carlozatwiki (talk) 19:52, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Carlozatwiki: Go read up MOS:TV. User ratings are not critic ratings. Audience viewership (ratings) refers to Nielsen ratings. User based ratings aren't reliable because they are user based. In short, they aren't audience viewership announced by Netflix. Also, the section is call "Critical reception" for a reason, it's not audience reception. — YoungForever(talk) 20:10, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
- YoungForever, Thanks for your reply. I read MOS:TV and found nothing stating that RT's audience scores cannot be used.
- You mentioned viewership, but the RT audience score is not a measurement of viewership, it's one of many ways of looking at the reception of a TV series or film. Yes, on this particular page the section is called "Critical Reception," but in fact on many Wikipedia articles the section is simply called "Reception," for example:
- So, I propose a compromise: changing the name of the section on Another Life to "Reception" and including my addition of, "However, the site's audience score is 60% positive based on 1277 user ratings."
- Here are examples of film and TV series pages with "Reception" sections that include both RT critic and audience scores:
- Thanks,
- Carlozatwiki (talk) 21:58, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Carlozatwiki:As I said, it is not appropriate to include user-based ratings on the reception. Hence, user-based audience. It is not a reliable source. Please see MOS:TVRECEPTION which it states:
Be careful when searching for reviews, and make sure they are coming from professional reviewers, and not simply a fan of the series. In the case of the general public, we use ratings to determine the popularity of a show, as it would be extremely difficult to find an accurate representation of fan opinion. This means that IMDb, TV.com, and similar websites that give "fan polls" are not reliable sources of information.
The audience score is a "fan poll". The general audiences are not professional reviewers. — YoungForever(talk) 22:19, 3 August 2019 (UTC)- YoungForever, "Be careful when searching for reviews..." but I didn't present it as a review. I presented it as exactly what it is: an RT audience score. In addition, "be careful" does not equal "this is not allowed." I still fail to see where using an RT audience score is prohibited, and, as I have pointed out, they are in fact used on Wikipedia. As I wrote when I made the edit, "I added a sentence about RT's audience score, because the discrepancy between it and the critic score is so dramatic." So I wasn't merely adding it for the sake of adding it, but because I found the discrepancy interesting and believe other readers might, too.
- I have suggested changing the section name to "Reception," (which is a heading that also appears on Wikipedia) in order to further remove any chance that readers might mistakenly think that it refers to a "critic's review." Since I've offered a change to a good-faith edit I made, and it seems you are refusing to accept that, could you now make make a good-faith effort to reword or change my edit in some way? Thanks, Carlozatwiki (talk) 11:36, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Carlozatwiki:You are failing to see that they are not reliable. As I said "fan poll" aka user-based ratings are not appropriate to use. Your WP:OTHER argument is invalid as it represents only a small minority. As I said before, user-based reviews are not professional reviews. — YoungForever(talk) 17:09, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
- YoungForever And as I indicated before, I'm not trying to pass off the RT audience score as a professional review -- and I've proposed a change that would make that even clearer. Carlozatwiki (talk) 21:30, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Carlozatwiki:You are failing to see that they are not reliable. As I said "fan poll" aka user-based ratings are not appropriate to use. Your WP:OTHER argument is invalid as it represents only a small minority. As I said before, user-based reviews are not professional reviews. — YoungForever(talk) 17:09, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Carlozatwiki:As I said, it is not appropriate to include user-based ratings on the reception. Hence, user-based audience. It is not a reliable source. Please see MOS:TVRECEPTION which it states:
- Hi Carlozatwiki see WP:UGC, I hope that answers your question. Its a matter of policy not personal preference. Esuka (talk) 18:33, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks @Esuka:. It does answer my question: there is not a hard and fast rule against using RT audience scores. This is evidenced by what it says on the page you linked to, i.e., "Content from websites whose content is largely user-generated is also generally unacceptable." Clearly, "generally" is the operative word here. If there was a strict policy of not using such things, that word would not be used. Just as "be careful" is a key term on the MOS:TVRECEPTION page YoungForever referred to. I am not saying these scores should be used always -- or even often -- but that in some instances (for example, when the difference between the numbers is great, as it is in this case) it's something that could be of interest to readers and valid to include. I've suggested a change to the edit, and am open to other changes that might address whatever concerns anyone may have about readers mistaking the audience score for a tally of professional critic reviews. Carlozatwiki (talk) 21:30, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
YoungForever and @Esuka: I ask you both to consider the fifth pillar of Wikipedia:
- "Wikipedia has no firm rules Wikipedia has policies and guidelines, but they are not carved in stone; their content and interpretation can evolve over time. The principles and spirit matter more than literal wording, and sometimes improving Wikipedia requires making exceptions. Be bold but not reckless in updating articles. And do not agonize over making mistakes: (almost) every past version of a page is saved, so mistakes can be easily corrected." Wikipedia:Five pillars
Thanks, Carlozatwiki (talk) 21:40, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Carlozatwiki: What part of not reliable source that you don't seem to understand? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, we can't add things without a reliable source. On WP:UGC, which states
Although review aggregators—for example, review aggregation sites—such as Rotten Tomatoes are used across the site, audience ratings based on the reviews of site members from the public are not.
The policy is there whether you like it or not. If you choose to ignore all policies and guidelines, veteran editors will revert you. You aren't improving or maintaining Wikipedia as you chose to ignore all rules. Please see WP:NOTIAR. — YoungForever(talk) 21:56, 4 August 2019 (UTC)- Wait a minute,YoungForever. What in the world are you basing your accusation that I've chosen "to ignore all rules" on? Carlozatwiki (talk) 22:34, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Carlozatwiki: You keep on insisting to add the user-based reviews from Rotten Tomatoes when it is clearly not appropriate to add on the Reception as they are not professional reviews. "User-based reviews" from Rotten Tomatoes is equivalent to IMDb reviews. — YoungForever(talk) 22:46, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
- You really need to let this go and move on. I personally think Youngforever should remove this entire section on her talkpage and ignore you. If you attempt to add user reviews you will be reverted. She has acted in good faith and explained something you clearly either don't understand or refuse to accept, that's on you not her. Esuka (talk) 18:44, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
- Wait a minute,YoungForever. What in the world are you basing your accusation that I've chosen "to ignore all rules" on? Carlozatwiki (talk) 22:34, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Carlozatwiki: What part of not reliable source that you don't seem to understand? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, we can't add things without a reliable source. On WP:UGC, which states
Hey, YoungForever – I haven't checked the article's sources, but I assume that the genres "martial arts" and "supernatural" are sourcable?... TIA. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:21, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
- @IJBall: I wasn't the one who added the genres though. If you watch the web TV series, you would notice that martial arts and supernatural fiction are used throughout the series significantly. — YoungForever(talk) 01:45, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
- Yep. But that's not how genres work on Wikipedia – they have to be sourced to some reliable source (in the article), or it's WP:OR. Note: I'm not saying you are at fault here at all – I'm just saying that the genres need to be sourced. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:47, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
- @IJBall: I just went ahead and added the reliable sources for Martial Arts and Supernatural fiction...there are actually several reliable sources on the article page itself. Yes, I went to the reliable sources website pages to double check. — YoungForever(talk) 02:06, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
- Yep. But that's not how genres work on Wikipedia – they have to be sourced to some reliable source (in the article), or it's WP:OR. Note: I'm not saying you are at fault here at all – I'm just saying that the genres need to be sourced. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:47, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
I made the changes of deleting the links because I saw no logic in the links leading to the episode description chart on the exact same page just a partial scroll above the viewership chart.
If the links led to different pages about the episodes, I'd have no problem; but leading to the page that you are already on I have a problem with --- especially since that page isn't that long.
Or am I missing something? 2600:8800:784:8F00:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 04:01, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
- @2600:8800:784:8F00:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D: How you not seen other TV series Television episode ratings tables? They all or most are linked like that. Go see Television episode ratings. Your WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT attitude is not going to work here. — YoungForever(talk) 04:43, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Regarding Why Women Kill
Hi YoungForever, I understand why you removed all those episode titles – #6 and #7 titles are not officially released, at least not on WGA directory – and that's why I left them in code comments rather than published. I do wonder whether it is necessary to remove the commented titles since it would be easier to update when CBS releases a new episode. Skywayer (talk) 19:20, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Skywayer: Still, they are not sourced. As I stated, WP:NOTCRYSTAL, we don't know if they are the official episode titles. We don't add speculations in hidden comments.WP:NOHURRY. — YoungForever(talk) 19:43, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
- @YoungForever: All right and thanks. Skywayer (talk) 20:37, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
Your AWB script
please check it's working correctly as it's removing short descriptions, see [2]. --Denniss (talk) 05:27, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Denniss: I added it back in on the Bruce Willis article, I am not sure why AWB was removing some of the short descriptions. That wasn't my intentions. Most of the short descriptions are still there. — YoungForever(talk) 05:41, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
Jonathan Scott move
Just an FYI your recent edit moving Jonathan Scott (television personality) is in essence a revert of [3]. The concerns from that move are still valid, perhaps reality TV personality should be used? - Galatz גאליץשיחה Talk 18:53, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Galatz: Thank you for bringing that up. I have changed it to "reality television personality" as it makes more sense than just reality TV. He isn't just a reality TV. — YoungForever(talk) 18:59, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
I was wondering is there any point in adding credits and prodcodes to this page's episodes? As Gabrielkat seems to own the rights to do this based on his reverting, just as he does with the Family Guy and American Dad episode details. 161.65.221.201 (talk) 00:40, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- @161.65.221.201: Clearly, he still has WP:OWNERSHIP issues which dates back to few years ago as you can see on his Talk page. I recommend reporting him to WP:ANI. — YoungForever(talk) 00:50, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Previous reporting hasn't changed anything and most likely neither will any future reports. I'll just note this page as another one that's a waste of time to edit. 161.65.221.201 (talk) 01:15, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- @161.65.221.201: I still recommend reporting him to WP:ANI. His WP:OWNERSHIP issues are not acceptable on Wikipedia as no one on Wikipedia can claim ownerships of articles. — YoungForever(talk) 01:30, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- He reverted you for no reason just so he could add the credits for the third episode himself moments later, that's just poor. He also doesn't engage people on his talkpage based on his reverting upon being warned, which doesn't look good for him. How can someone discuss his behavior if his ego doesn't allow it? Esuka (talk) 10:21, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Hey guys, on behalf of the IP, I reported him at ANI. I remember he did this a few years ago on some pages on my watchlist and I blown away by his behavior. Since it's still going on and the problem hasn't stopped, he needs to be reported. Chronic ownership issues like this is not okay. Drovethrughosts (talk) 18:56, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thankyou! Hopefully by the end of all this he learns to play nice with others. Though given his long history of WP:OWN behavior I doubt it. Esuka (talk) 22:11, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Update: Gabrielkat has been blocked indefinitely by an administrator after Drovethrughosts reported him to WP:ANI about his WP:OWN issues. — YoungForever(talk) 22:34, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thankyou! Hopefully by the end of all this he learns to play nice with others. Though given his long history of WP:OWN behavior I doubt it. Esuka (talk) 22:11, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Hey guys, on behalf of the IP, I reported him at ANI. I remember he did this a few years ago on some pages on my watchlist and I blown away by his behavior. Since it's still going on and the problem hasn't stopped, he needs to be reported. Chronic ownership issues like this is not okay. Drovethrughosts (talk) 18:56, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Previous reporting hasn't changed anything and most likely neither will any future reports. I'll just note this page as another one that's a waste of time to edit. 161.65.221.201 (talk) 01:15, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
I was not adding unsourced material.
I just feel that production numbers for upcoming episodes of Bless the Harts and Family Guy should be noted from the same source as their titles. --TVBuff90 (talk) 02:07, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- @TVBuff90: They are not on the reliable sources which make them unsourced. You are just assuming the production codes based on the numbers next to the episode titles. They are not the same thing. WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL. — YoungForever(talk) 03:00, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
Copyright.
Explain to me how my fucking edits on Living with Yourself, specifically the ones on the synopsis plots, were "copyright". The fuck they are copyright, they are not. And how am I supposed to link to Netflix?— Preceding unsigned comment added by ElijahPepe (talk • contribs) 17:16, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- @ElijahPepe: The episode summaries were copied and pasted from Netflix which are copyright violations. Summaries are supposed to be in your own words. Please read up WP:COPYVIO and remain civil. — YoungForever(talk) 00:37, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
I haven't gotten around to adding this to the article yet (and I may not get to it), but this source mentions Bianca Kajlich and Leo Howard also having recurring roles in season #2. And this is the source that mentions that Riley Voelkel will be guest-starring on Legacies. FWIW. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:14, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Done: I went ahead and added them. — YoungForever(talk) 19:29, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Regarding Land of the Loft
In response to my edit on Bob's Burgers Land of the Loft episode you state "Please stop adding unsourced content". I would like to point out that I used the TheFutonCritic website as my source, which is an official press release issued by Fox. It states the production number after (BOB-"production number here" at the top of the listing section, next to the episode title, which you can view here: http://www.thefutoncritic.com/listings/20191023fox19/.
Since the website states: "The following article is a press release issued by the aforementioned network and/or company" - I believe this should be considered a valid source. Lw6W (talk) 19:01, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Lw6W: They are not on the reliable sources which make them unsourced. You are just assuming the production codes based on the numbers next to the episode titles. They are not the same thing. WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL — YoungForever(talk) 19:09, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Stumptown
I saw your comment about disruptive editing. It seems I was wrong to try and repeat a mistake I already made by adding an unnecessary addition. Going forward, I'll make sure to note when not to make changes. GenesisMaster (talk) 16:53, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Love Death + Robots
Dear Young Forever
I recently watched and really enjoyed the Netflix series Love Death + Robots and wanted to know more about the development so naturally I went straight to Wikipedia.
My favourite episode was 'Three Robots'
The Wiki entry for this episode has the boy robots names but not the triangular girl bot. I have found her name from other sources and she is called 11-45-G which is very cool.
I tried to edit her name to complete the detail of the episode but my Wiki skills are not good enough. I noticed you have edited the page and thought I would ask you if you could help fill in this missing detail.
Here's a source link:
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Characters/LoveDeathAndRobotsThreeRobots
Hopefully you could help fix this. If you can't help how do I contact Wikipedia to ask?
Your help is greatly appreciated.
Kind regards,
Christian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christiankay (talk • contribs) 22:06, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- @Christiankay: TV Tropes is not a reliable source as it is a user-based website. — YoungForever(talk) 22:10, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- @Youngforever Shall I tweet David Fincher and ask if he will confirm the name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christiankay (talk • contribs) 22:27, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- @Christiankay: If his Twitter account is not a verified account with check mark, it is not a reliable source. — YoungForever(talk) 22:32, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- @Youngforever Shall I tweet David Fincher and ask if he will confirm the name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christiankay (talk • contribs) 22:27, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
Potential new TV series article
Hey, I've got a new TV series article for you, if you're interested: 68 Whiskey. This Deadline source should get you started... I saw an ad for this for the first time today – looks like it's set to premiere on Paramount Network (early?) next year. I probably don't have time to write this up, so I thought I'd give you a shot! 
--IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:02, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- @IJBall: Done: I just started the 68 Whiskey article with several reliable sources alongside with the one you mentioned above. — YoungForever(talk) 00:59, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
Hug N' Bugs
Pliot should be notable and if you go to Marge the Lumberjill it is also plot summary. So what are y'all saying here? I clearly provided references.104.172.56.54 (talk) 08:02, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
- @104.172.56.54: An episode article should not contain only plot summary. Also, Marge the Lumberjill is being redirected to the List of The Simpsons episodes article. — YoungForever(talk) 15:17, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
- It's called there's also reviews too. Look at all those hella ton of them. All with reference and citation too. What more do you guys want? 104.172.56.54 (talk) 05:55, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- @104.172.56.54: Plot summary and reception are still not enough for an episode article. — YoungForever(talk) 06:42, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Then why do all these recent The Simpsons episodes have articles if they're all plot and reviews? 104.172.56.54 (talk) 05:30, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
- @104.172.56.54: WP:OTHER. Bless the Harts lacks significant coverage for each episode to have individual television episode articles. — YoungForever(talk) 06:01, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
- Then why do all these recent The Simpsons episodes have articles if they're all plot and reviews? 104.172.56.54 (talk) 05:30, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
- @104.172.56.54: Plot summary and reception are still not enough for an episode article. — YoungForever(talk) 06:42, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- It's called there's also reviews too. Look at all those hella ton of them. All with reference and citation too. What more do you guys want? 104.172.56.54 (talk) 05:55, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Thank you very much! And sorry again!
Laneus (talk) 18:54, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
|
Merry Christmas YoungForever |
|
Hi YoungForever, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas |
Merry Christmas 2019!
Amaury • 18:50, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
Happy New Year, YoungForever!
YoungForever,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010Talk 00:20, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
A new decade begins
I'm a day late, but...
.jpg)
-
MMXX Lunar Calendar
Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.
– 2020 is a leap year – news article.
– Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year
– Amaury • 19:49, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Yes, That Was My Fault
The article in contention: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siesta_Key_(TV_series)#Episodes
I had just reviewed the format of the titles to assure you or I, and you were correct. Sorry about that. Bl1tzkrieg1940 (talk) 22:37, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
You might care to check out Bless the Harts (season 1). Homerfan12 created that today as well. --AussieLegend (✉) 02:51, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
- @AussieLegend: Everything from Bless the Harts (season 1) is copied and pasted from the main article. — YoungForever(talk) 03:10, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello, The "Raising Dion" page has a typo, of which I was attempting to correct (and you reversed it). The character "Kat Neese" is supposed to be "Kat Reese" (she is Dion's aunt). All I did was change the "N" in the last name to an "R" to correct the error someone else made. Thank you. Ac034 (talk) 01:28, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
- Ac034,
- It was NOT an error. Her last name is Neese. — YoungForever(talk) 01:48, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
- Firstly, no need to use all caps when addressing me. Secondly, it is an error. Kat is unmarried and has the same last name as her sister Nicole, which is Reese. Look it up online if you don't believe me. (No need to reply, I'm not interested in going back and forth--just letting you know that you made a mistake). Ac034 (talk) 03:34, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Ac034:It isn't mistake. Go back to the episode when the hospital called out her last name which you can hear it say Dr. Neese and the caption reads Dr. Neese as well. — YoungForever(talk) 03:43, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
- Firstly, no need to use all caps when addressing me. Secondly, it is an error. Kat is unmarried and has the same last name as her sister Nicole, which is Reese. Look it up online if you don't believe me. (No need to reply, I'm not interested in going back and forth--just letting you know that you made a mistake). Ac034 (talk) 03:34, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
This article was probably moved to mainspace too soon, as currently all of the citations are still rather routine pre-release press. I'm letting it through per WP:NOTBURO, since it looks like there's enough big-name actors and crew attached to the show such that it will almost certainly become notable once it airs. signed, Rosguill talk 00:36, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Rosguill: I wasn't the one who moved the Draft to the mainspace. — YoungForever(talk) 00:45, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
- My apologies, thanks for the note. signed, Rosguill talk 00:48, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello YoungForever,
As an experienced user, why do you think that this blog website is not a reliable source? There are several sites writing about the series locations but no one else has listed the ones that you deleted. There are images to compare the screenshots with the real place that seem legit to me. Also Decider.com has the structure of a blog (it's a Worldpress site). Thanks for your time and for your help. --Victor Hardy Jr (talk) 21:20, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Victor Hardy Jr: Blog websites are not reliable sources because they are self-published sources. Self-published sources are not reliable sources. Blog websites do not have staff writers. Please read WP:RSSELF. Decider is NOT a blog website. Decider has staff writers. — YoungForever(talk) 21:41, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
I changed it because Katie McGrath is listed that way in the credits on the show. Half of those actors aren’t on the show anymore. It should be updated to mirror how it’s shown on the show. Which is Melissa Benoist, Chyler Leigh, Katie McGrath, Jesse Rath, Nicole Maines, Azie Tesfai, Staz Nair, Julie Gonzaga and David Harewood. That’s why I changed it. Also, some of those actors weren’t even regulars. Can I please update it to reflect who’s currently on the show? Mumclaren (talk) 00:25, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Mumclaren: It doesn't work that way. Starring cast members supposed to go by how they are credited starting from the pilot episode of the series and new starring cast members will be added to the bottom of the list, per MOS:TVCAST. — YoungForever(talk) 00:30, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
- But why not beaten it up? Like half those actors aren’t on the show. If I want to know who’s currently on the show and click the page. I would have no idea. Unless you can put the seasons next to their name so people know who’s on the show currently. I think that would beaten things up if we can’t take the names off. Mumclaren (talk) 01:10, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Mumclaren: Again, that isn't how it works. Season articles are the ones with the starring cast members within the seasons. — YoungForever(talk) 01:14, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
- Season articles? And you guys really can’t type the seasons they’re in or were in next to their names? I feel like that would help people a lot. Mumclaren (talk) 04:49, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Mumclaren: There are guidelines and policies on Wikipedia for a reason. You should have got the message by now when several different editors reverted you. — YoungForever(talk) 04:57, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
- Season articles? And you guys really can’t type the seasons they’re in or were in next to their names? I feel like that would help people a lot. Mumclaren (talk) 04:49, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Mumclaren: Again, that isn't how it works. Season articles are the ones with the starring cast members within the seasons. — YoungForever(talk) 01:14, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
- But why not beaten it up? Like half those actors aren’t on the show. If I want to know who’s currently on the show and click the page. I would have no idea. Unless you can put the seasons next to their name so people know who’s on the show currently. I think that would beaten things up if we can’t take the names off. Mumclaren (talk) 01:10, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
There is a draft article for the upcoming Walker, Texas Ranger "reboot" that exists, that I've been working on today. Just letting you know, in case you're interested in adding to it/improving it. I've also created a redirect at Walker (TV series), which is the likely destination for this one... I think once it gets some kind of premiere date from The CW, it will meet WP:TVSHOW and can be moved into mainspace. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
- @IJBall: Thank you for letting me know. — YoungForever(talk) 15:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
Quick point on WP:UWs
YoungForever, one point about WP:UWs – if editors before you have given, say, Level 2 and Level 3 warnings, it helps if you follow those up with the Level 4 warning. If you don't do that, if somebody tries to, say, take that IP to WP:AIV, it will likely be turned down for "not having been given a final warning". So it doesn't help to give a Level 2 warning after a Level 3 warning was just given. Just do you know... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
- @IJBall: I wasn't aware that it would make a difference as they weren't the same types of warnings. Anyway, I fixed it. — YoungForever(talk) 22:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
FYI
Re this reversion, the editor who added the date is an IP hopping, persistent, returning vandal who keeps chaning |last_aired=present to |last_aired=<date of last episode aired>, violating WP:REDBIO, adding bad links and links to disambiguation pages at multiple articles. He/she has used several IPs, just came off a 31-hour block on one of them and has hit some articles multiple times. If you see any similar activity let me know and I'll rollback all of the edits. (I've got a script that does that) --AussieLegend (✉) 06:24, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
- @AussieLegend: Will do. — YoungForever(talk) 06:36, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
I'd like very much for a response to this topic as I think it would help to improve the article in the future if it reaches the point to create individual season pages like this one. If you agree I could do the proper edition. Thanks. emaponche (talk) 02:21, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
According to crediting, was Ronni Hawk "main cast" on this show in season #1, or just "recurring"? I've heard conflicting info on this... Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:35, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
- @IJBall: She wasn't credited as part of the main cast, I am pretty sure she is just recurring. I just double checked. — YoungForever(talk) 00:52, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Tom Hangs as Avicii pseudonym
Hi YoungForever,
I added 'Tom Hangs' as another name that Avicii is known by; however, this was reverted by you. Are there issues with my edit or with adding Tom Hangs under Other Names? Thanks Chaboi54 (talk) 00:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Chaboi54: You need a reliable source to confirm that he used that name because it wasn't widely known. — YoungForever(talk) 00:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Dumb question since I'm new to this - is a Youtube video (interview) a valid source?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaboi54 (talk • contribs) 01:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Chaboi54: Youtube video (interview) is not a reliable source because anyone can upload videos on Youtube. — YoungForever(talk) 02:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Dumb question since I'm new to this - is a Youtube video (interview) a valid source?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaboi54 (talk • contribs) 01:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Ratings
Hi, I notice you update the ratings for a lot of articles using Showbuzz Daily, but since TV by the Numbers shut down the share for broadcast series hasn't been added. Left of the viewers column in the Showbuzz Daily articles there's two columns with the male 18-49 and female 18-49. You just have to manually average the two numbers. For example, if they're both 4, then you just add the share as 4. The share is still in the source, but you haven't been adding it to the ratings tables. I just wanted to let you know that you can, because it's in the source! Also, Nielsen updates the Live + same-day numbers ever so slightly when DVR ratings are released, so you can remove the Showbuzz Daily ref and use the updated figure which is listed in the Programming Insider ref. If we want complete accuracy, then we should be updating the Live + same-day numbers in the tables as Nielsen does. Happy editing! Heartfox (talk) 04:31, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Heartfox: For Showbuzz Daily, you can't add the two columns as you don't know the how they add up to ratings like what formula they used, this is considered to be WP:SYNTH. — YoungForever(talk) 04:48, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- What do you mean? The share is the average of the male share and female share. If the male is 4 and the female is 4 (these are listed in Showbuzz Daily), then you can just add them and divide by 2 to get the average. 4 + 4 = 8, divided by 2 = 4. This is basic math? Heartfox (talk) 05:12, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Heartfox: This is considered to be WP:SYNTH. You can't just assumed that's how they add up the shares. Did they say that's how they add up the shares? No, they did not. I compared old share ratings of TV by the Numbers with Showbuzz Daily old ratings (using the formula you think they used) for shares, sometimes they don't match up. — YoungForever(talk) 05:23, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Regardless, they're all listed in the Programming Insider articles, so there's really no reason for excluding them. In the meantime, I am contacting these publications for further information about the way shares are calculated. I will send you a link to what they say if they respond :) Heartfox (talk) 05:37, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Heartfox: FYI, per Template:Television episode ratings, shares are optional. In fact, almost all the columns are optional. — YoungForever(talk) 18:23, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Well, yes of course shares are optional, as cable shows do not have their shares released. However, all broadcast shows (ABC, CBS, CW, Fox, NBC) do have their shares released, and so I was just wondering why you haven't added them when they're in the Programming Insider references. Heartfox (talk) 18:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Heartfox: Hence, the word "optional". As I told you before, they are not explicitly on the Showbuzz Daily sources. Combining information within a source that never explicitly said something is still considered to be WP:SYNTH. — YoungForever(talk) 18:42, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- As I told you before, they are explicitly in the Programming Insider sources. And as it says in the template, "No Share" is "specially for use with cable series." Even articles that go back 14 years (see American Idol (season 5)) have shares next to the ratings. Why are you stopping a 14-year-old practice when the shares are available?? Heartfox (talk) 18:51, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Heartfox: If you want to include them, then you can add them yourself with the Programming Insider sources. WP:SOFIXIT I am not obligated to do anything. You wish is not my command. I am not going to go back to every single TV series articles and fix them. Optional is optional, it is not required. So, please stopping implying it is required. In addition, final ratings of Programming Insider are always significantly later than Showbuzz Daily ranging from 1-3 days later than Showbuzz Daily. I will no longer respond to this discussion. Unless Showbuzz Daily have responded to you and you have a link to prove it. — YoungForever(talk) 19:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- As I told you before, they are explicitly in the Programming Insider sources. And as it says in the template, "No Share" is "specially for use with cable series." Even articles that go back 14 years (see American Idol (season 5)) have shares next to the ratings. Why are you stopping a 14-year-old practice when the shares are available?? Heartfox (talk) 18:51, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Heartfox: Hence, the word "optional". As I told you before, they are not explicitly on the Showbuzz Daily sources. Combining information within a source that never explicitly said something is still considered to be WP:SYNTH. — YoungForever(talk) 18:42, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Well, yes of course shares are optional, as cable shows do not have their shares released. However, all broadcast shows (ABC, CBS, CW, Fox, NBC) do have their shares released, and so I was just wondering why you haven't added them when they're in the Programming Insider references. Heartfox (talk) 18:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Heartfox: FYI, per Template:Television episode ratings, shares are optional. In fact, almost all the columns are optional. — YoungForever(talk) 18:23, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Regardless, they're all listed in the Programming Insider articles, so there's really no reason for excluding them. In the meantime, I am contacting these publications for further information about the way shares are calculated. I will send you a link to what they say if they respond :) Heartfox (talk) 05:37, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Heartfox: This is considered to be WP:SYNTH. You can't just assumed that's how they add up the shares. Did they say that's how they add up the shares? No, they did not. I compared old share ratings of TV by the Numbers with Showbuzz Daily old ratings (using the formula you think they used) for shares, sometimes they don't match up. — YoungForever(talk) 05:23, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- What do you mean? The share is the average of the male share and female share. If the male is 4 and the female is 4 (these are listed in Showbuzz Daily), then you can just add them and divide by 2 to get the average. 4 + 4 = 8, divided by 2 = 4. This is basic math? Heartfox (talk) 05:12, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Infobox television
Just an FYI, the replacement for show_name_2 is alt_name, not name _2.[4] --AussieLegend (✉) 16:22, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- @AussieLegend: I am aware of that. I fix it right away when I realized I missed it. I might have missed some here and there. — YoungForever(talk) 18:35, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Consequence of Sound is a reputable source and publication. The information is straight from the screeners of the show. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.178.99.75 (talk) 23:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
- We don't ever list every single guest stars on every single episodes on the episode tables like way you did for non-talk shows. In addition, the directors and writers that you added were all unsourced. WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL. They still need to be sourced because the episodes haven't been release yet.— YoungForever(talk) 00:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
In case you didn't know
Hey, I've noticed you fixing the deprecated parameters in {{Infobox television}} which is amazing, great work! Just wanted to let you know in case you didn't know that while |name= is the preferred parameter name, the parameter itself is not even needed as the infobox handles the correct name from the title (without the disambiguation). Only when the title of the infobox is different is that even needed. --Gonnym (talk) 16:57, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello my friend
Can you help me to edit a pages title Draft:DC Super Hero High (TV series), Draft:BizarroTV, Draft:Marvel's 616, Draft:Resident Alien (TV series) and Draft:The Magic Order (TV series) please. Blackknight1234567890 (talk) 07:13, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Hiya. Just a quick one to apologise for the word I used in my reply. My friend was disappointed with the spoiler so I was just trying to help, you know I find the rules very confusing here. I am being told off at the moment for adding FACTual things to a TV shows page, I KNOW they're right, but I got disciplined. Lol. I was only trying to update some misinformation. Anyway, I'm not going to anymore, too scared! Lol. Cheers for reading! KellanRose7 (talk) 03:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Infobox TV
Noticed you were replacing the deprecated params in {{infobox television}}. I'm going to set up a bot run in the next day or two, so don't feel like you need to go through all 40k pages! Primefac (talk) 15:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
Hey! Just coming here to wonder if we wanna keep Lyne in recurring until the beginning of season 2? I know in the past we've been a bit of a stickler about adjusting casting changes (i.e. recurring --> main) at the beginning of the season. I don't believe it's a hard and fast guideline (that I can see), so I have no problem leaving it in or moving her back, but thought I'd just drop by and ask! QueerFilmNerdtalk 20:37, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
- @QueerFilmNerd: I am fine with leaving her on the main cast subsection, but make it clear she is recurring in the first season like it is now:
Lyne Renée as General Sarah Alder[source 1][source 2] (season 2;[source 3] recurring season 1), who is the commanding general of the United States' witch armed forces and in charge of Fort Salem. She is also the witch who originally negotiated the Salem Accords 300 years ago, despite remaining a middle-aged woman to the present day.
— YoungForever(talk) 20:50, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
Draft:Walker (TV series) redux
It looks like the show has been scheduled for January 2021 by The CW, so this can probably be moved into mainspace now, as it meets WP:TVSHOW. Let me know if you want me to do this, and I can move it, either later today or tomorrow... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:52, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
- @IJBall: If it meets WP:TVSHOW, then it is sufficient enough to move to mainspace. Yes, please move to the mainspace when you have the time to. Thanks. — YoungForever(talk) 19:58, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
- Done – the draft has been moved into mainspace at Walker (TV series). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:04, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
Added Kamryn Kunody to B Positive
Hello, I added Kamryn Kunody to the B Postive page as she plays Maddie. I'm happy to include source(s) but I believe the sources you list should satisfy the need. Much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkunody (talk • contribs) 14:36, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Kkunody: Incorrect, under the Casting section, none of the reliable sources include her casting and her character. You need a reliable source to add her and her character. — YoungForever(talk) 14:40, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- The first source listed on your page includes Kamryn Kunody as part of the B Positive cast per the Deadline article. Also listed on the CBS website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkunody (talk • contribs) 14:49, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- Is Deadline a reliable source? Thank you.Kkunody (talk) 15:09, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Kkunody: Yes, it is a reliable source. However, her character is not on the Deadline source. — YoungForever(talk) 15:14, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- Please see Businesswire reference noting Kamryn Kunody as Maddie. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200519005876/en/CBS-Unveils-2020-2021-Primetime-Lineup-3-NewKkunody (talk) 15:26, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Kkunody: Well, you didn't add the reliable source there. Anyway, I just added it. — YoungForever(talk) 16:01, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- Please see Businesswire reference noting Kamryn Kunody as Maddie. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200519005876/en/CBS-Unveils-2020-2021-Primetime-Lineup-3-NewKkunody (talk) 15:26, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Kkunody: Yes, it is a reliable source. However, her character is not on the Deadline source. — YoungForever(talk) 15:14, 26 May 2020 (UTC)