User talk:Yankeesrj12/Archive 1

Userpage	Talk	Archive

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Yankeesrj12. 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

Before making drastic changes to the DCOM article, please discuss it on the talk page. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 01:05, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Please take a look at WP:CIVIL, WP:BITE and WP:AGF. Please be more polite to other editors, commenting that a page "looks like puke" doesn't help our case much. Happy Editing. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 22:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot 03:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

When commenting on other people's edits, please be civil and assume good faith. Thanks. —tregoweth (talk) 11:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Power of 10 Ratings, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Rjd0060 03:31, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and replaced the prod template with an Articles for Deletion template, due to the note you left on my talk page effectively contesting the prod. You can participate in the AfD discussion here. --Dachannien^Talk_Contrib 02:51, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add 1-1 until final score has been posted --Yankeesrj12 02:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I didn't. I wait for the boxscores on MiLB to update. If you're in the individual game, it shows final (with the pitchers) several minutes before the overall front "scoreboard" page does. In most cases, the games are available on the radio as well. -- dakern74 (talk) 03:23, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

To request a block go to WP:AIV and follow the instructions linked to in the green block. You need to make sure the user has had the required warnings except in exceptional cases. See User Talk:69.47.110.119. He has been blocked for a month. Usually an IP editor gets 31 hours but this is a repeat so they gave him more. --NrDg 00:08, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Please list the sources you say you have for the episode information, don't just state you have them. That is what I was asking for, not just assertions. See discussion topic I started on Talk:List of Wizards of Waverly Place episodes and reply there if you have comments or questions. Thanks. --NrDg 20:05, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I know this really isnt a source, but

http://www.tv.com/wizards-of-waverly-place/show/69866/episode.html

http://www.pazsaz.com/wizwav.html

and i havent seen episodes 17-22 anywhere, so i delted them --Yankeesrj12 22:06, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

The tv.com one is usable for now. I'm not sure about the pazsaz one for reliability. Put this information in the article either at the top or as a reference or as an external link which is where TV.com normally goes and note that the information is from TV.com. Make sure that the information for each episode is what TV.com shows and no more. I won't challenge the reliability of TV.com and I'll let pazsaz.com pass too, other editors might not. Let me know if you need help doing any of what I suggest. --NrDg 22:35, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Yankeesrj12, the reason why you were unable to add the next row to the table was because you were adding it after the |}, which closes the table. Hope this explains why, if you have any questions about it, reply on my talk page. Happy editing! - zachinthebox _{(User • Talk)} 17:08, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I reply to comments made in my talk page on my talk page. I like to keep conversations in one place. Thanks. --NrDg 23:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Why are you removing content I added to this article? The writer and director information is in TV.com and should be a part of the episode descriptions. I plan to add details as the episodes air. As it stands now your deletions appear arbitrary. --NrDg 02:45, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

The only reason I deleted the info is because it is on no other Disney Series, and shouldnt be on this. --Yankeesrj12 17:43, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Check List of Hannah Montana episodes which is a Disney Series. When the episode pages were removed this was the only way to get some of the information in those pages back in. It seems to be working there. If you can justify individual episode pages for "Wizards" it won't be needed. Very hard to do as there is unlikely to be any real world notability of the individual episodes. --NrDg 17:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Please remember to always be civil. Typing in all caps can be construed as shouting. Corvus cornix 23:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I totally understand, it gets frustrating at times. Why not go back and rewrite your comments in lower case?  :) Corvus cornix 23:10, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I replaced your header. I hope you don't mind.  :) Corvus cornix 23:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem.  :) Corvus cornix 23:16, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Could we at least get rid of the production code, how is that usueful? --Yankeesrj12 02:15, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

The reason for the production code is that it shows the shooting order of the episodes as opposed to the broadcast order. The production code would serve no purpose if Disney broadcast shows in the proper order, which they don't. Some people (me for example), like to see the shows in the order the writers designed and find the production codes useful for replaying episodes taped. Most lists of episodes have the production code, it is a named field in the template, so it is kind of standard to use it. Major problem is determining what the production code is. Only real source that is trusted is U.S Copyright Office and it lags a lot. TV.com is what people use until we get better info. --NrDg 02:35, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

While the first Futon Critic article mentioned early on that the show was put on hiatus, Fox does plan on putting the show back in November; after K-Ville repeats, the time slot will feature three episodes of The Next Great American Band on October 19 and 26 and November 2. The article for American Band mentioned that "Nashville" will be pre-empted on those nights, assuming that it would return on 11/9. P.S. -- If you decide to revert anyway, could you please keep the categories and the CKXT-TV (Sun TV) links? -- azumanga 01:24, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

== Anchor woman ==--MarineCorps 02:47, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Anchor woman was canceled after the first night. http://www.headlineplanet.com/base/articles/1187905554.html --MarineCorps 02:15, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh. I see where you are are headed with that. That makes sense. --MarineCorps 02:47, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I got the titles of the episodes from watching the episodes. The title is listed in the opening scene. Episode 1 is just Rollercoaster and Episode 2 is just Lawn Gnome Beach Party of Terror. Published guide information confirms what the episode official titles are. We should title the episodes in the article to be the same as the official names.

Removing the writer and director columns was probably a good idea for this series. It looks the the writers and directors are going to be the same for each episode and the table was starting to look real messy. --NrDg 15:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes thats why i deleted the writer and director plus each episode is only 15 minutes so there is 2 episodes in each episode --Yankeesrj12 17:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

In the List of Kim Possible episodes, see episode 27 for example, they gave each of the 15 minute episodes its own table position. Disney tends to break apart the two 15 minute episodes when they rebroadcast them on Toon Disney so I think it would be more useful and look better if each 15 minute episode stood on its own. Also are we sure that Disney is going to do two episodes at a time - has that been decided yet? --NrDg 17:16, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Look at this list List of The Replacements episodes thats what Phineas and Ferb will be like. --Yankeesrj12 17:35, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, that's cool. Only problem is with the 2 previews that were shown. The original date won't match the original date of the other co-broadcast episode. --NrDg 18:04, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I saw your edit to the Erie Freeze and (not being very sports literate) became curious. Why were they kicked out? Should the reason be mentioned in the article? --​​​​D​​tbohrer​​​​^{talk•contribs} 01:50, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

If you revert my deletion of unsourced material, as you did at Pushing Daisies, then it is incumbent upon you to provide reliable sources. Corvus cornix 17:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Shut the hell up. I don't have to listen to you. What are you, 12? Are you some goody goody that you need bright colors? Are you stupid. So if you have shit to say, bring it on, because I am a better person than you and I don't have to send people stupid ass messages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.163.82.122 (talk) 22:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading Image:Normal 110537 4049 ful.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 01:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading Image:01.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 01:20, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Your cite says it will be on the "big screen" which I take to mean shown in theaters and therefore not a Disney Channel Original Movie. --NrDg 17:06, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Before we even start the argument, let me ask you one serious question. Does Mary Alice call ALL models one by one just like Tyra Banks does on America's next top model?

Well the answer is definitely NO, with that said your so called "Chart" is not the right chart that should be used because it's unreliable and Marie Alice doesn't even call ALL of them to have this kind of chart.

So my best advice for you is to take Prozac and get to your senses Ok ?

Don't argue with me cause i know and every one here knows that "MY" table is BETTER. You are just MAD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.154.56 (talk) 21:57, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:01.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, given the work you've done, but weekly ratings charts are not considered encyclopedic and as such they have been removed. Discussions about ratings should reflect an overview of the series, rather than a string of numbers that only apply to a specific market. Please feel free to ask if you have any questions about this. --Ckatz^chat_spy 03:25, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Please don't restore the chart until this is resolved. The fact that the weekly rating are in some other articles doesn't mean the error should be perpetuated. I'll try to explain a bit better when I have more time later today. Thanks! --Ckatz^chat_spy 17:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

There are many bits of information about shows that do not qualify for inclusion. Countless bits of trivia are added on a daily basis across the television articles; some are deemed suitable for an encyclopedia article, while many others are removed. Does it mean the subject material isn't interesting? Not necessarily - just that it is not appropriate for Wikipedia. Take a look at the the articles for mature series - those such as The Simpsons and Doctor Who, with strong Wikiprojects and hundreds of editors. Then, take a look at the articles for the newer, "hit" series such as Heroes and Lost. You'll see that they do not include week-to-week ratings information. Ratings, when included, are treated on a season-to-season basis. Hope this helps. --Ckatz^chat_spy 04:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The Biggest Loser (Season 5), because another editor is suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Russ (talk) 03:07, 23 November 2007 (UTC)