User talk:AussieLegend/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

→

Archive 15

Verizon

Thanks - the case history saves a tremendous amount of time at AIV. Kuru (talk) 15:49, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

If only we didn't need it......... --AussieLegend (talk) 15:51, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Derek Iversen

I've removed the prod (and the prod2) because the author was NOT blocked at the time. His current block was imposed over 10 hours after this creation ("11:25, 4 April 2011 JamesBWatson (Talk | contribs | block) blocked Frantzedward.cha (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 1 week"), but his previous one expired in April 2010 not April 2011 ("17:19, 2 April 2010 ESkog (Talk | contribs | block) blocked Frantzedward.cha (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 31 hours "). Copied from the block log. I've got nothing to say either way on the article as such, but the author was a free agent at the time of the creation and edits. Deletion of the article will have to rest on its own merits (or lack of them...) not on the status of the author. Sorry, folks... Peridon (talk) 10:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

That explains why I was confused - I read the 2010 in the block log as 2011 for some reason. --AussieLegend (talk) 10:59, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I think that was the problem for 117 as well - I've put the same message on their page as well. When I suggested prod to them, I really meant 'on some other grounds'. Peridon (talk) 11:10, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I didn't miss read it. When I said "BLP created by a blocked user", I meant that the creator has now been blocked. A blocked user can't create an article. 117Avenue (talk) 18:37, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

That isn't reason to delete an article though. He wasn't blocked when he created the article. --AussieLegend (talk) 23:36, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Sonny with a Chance

Guess the brain wan't firing on all cylinders there. 117Avenue (talk) 06:16, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

It happens. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:20, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Commonwealth or Federation

Hey again there AussieLegend!

You must watch that Sydney NYE Fireworks page as much as me hehe. Anyhoo, I noticed you changed back some of the recent changes I did to the article page but wondered if the "Federation Star" should display as "Commonwealth Star"? Although both names are correct, would it be correct to say that (in this case) the name of the link should be that same as the article it's linking too? Let me know what ya think. AnimatedZebra (talk) 16:23, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

It's a matter of association. The theme was "Centenary of Federation" so "Federation Star" is more appropriate since it provides an obvious link for readers. --AussieLegend (talk) 16:29, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

LOL, if I'd only looked in the other collumn. Thanks again! AnimatedZebra (talk) 16:40, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Caitlin Todd

Hi, I see you just edited the Kate Todd article, in which the character is now referred to by her last name instead of her first name "as with any bio", but excepted for Gibbs and McGee (which are mostly referred to by their last names), the other character articles/bios for NCIS (Abby, Tony, Ziva, Ducky, Jenny, etc.) mostly refer to the characters by their first name. In the article about her, Ziva David is never referred to as "David", only as "Ziva". While editing the article, you carefully changed every "Kate" into "Todd" but didn't change any "Tony" into "DiNozzo", any "Abby" into "Sciuto" nor any "Ducky" in "Mallard" or "Dr. Mallard". With all due respect, because of the aforementionned facts I don't feel that your edit is pertinent, but since you're obviously an experienced Wikipedian, I wanted to talk to you about it instead of simply pressing the "undo" button. It took me a lot of time to re-arrange this article and I know you'll understand why I want to discuss such a change. Sincerely, SchwartzPadre (talk) 18:37, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

As an encyclopaedia, we aim to be consistent, and calling some characters by their first name, while others are referred to by their last, is inconsistent. All of the characters should be referred to by their last name, as McGee and Gibbs generally are. Obviously, as you've identified, there are special issues for Ziva and Ducky. Calling Ziva "David" could be ambiguous, but "Dr Mallard" is OK. There are times where we have to ignore the rules to avoid losing the message and Ziva is just one of those cases. I didn't have time to finish renaming the characters but will get to it later if somebody doesn't beat me first. I understand that you spent some time rewriting the article. I must admit, I was a little concerned when I saw your edit summary,[1] because ncis.wikia.com, being a user edited site, is not considered to be a reliable source. It's classified as a self-published source. "Personal research" is not generally acceptable but the new version appears to be an improvement on the old article, which is why I didn't revert. --AussieLegend (talk) 19:20, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it was only after I saved my edit that I realized writing "personal research" was ambiguous; what I meant was that I re-watched the episodes to gather informations, not that I did what WP calls "oiginal research" or "good faith edits". As for the NCIS wiki, I just picked up facts but I added references to episodes to them. As you saw I spent quite some time adding references in order to prove my work's worth and reliability so I am grateful that you didn't revert without reading the overhauled article. Have a nice day! SchwartzPadre (talk) 07:23, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I know it's been 6 days since the edit has been made but I still disagree with it; I went through random TV character articles and I noticed that they are routinely referred to by their first names. Examples include Jack Shephard from Lost, Michael Scofield from Prison Break, Veronica Mars from the eponymous show, Rachel Green from Friends, Claire Bennet from Heroes and the list goes on. So, sorry to bother you with that but it still puzzles me that you took a great care in changing every "Kate" into "Todd", especially since the other NCIS characters (as mentionned before, excepted Gibbs and McGee who are mostly referred to by their last names in and outside the show) are referred to by their first names. To be honest, when I overhauled the article I indeed took a great care in referring to her as Kate so the article would be treated as the other NCIS characters' articles, so if you agree (or at least if you don't mind) I'm ready to change the references back into "Kate". Oh, and one last thing: and I wanted to know your opinion about adding an image of her, as it is the case in the articles for Gibbs, Tony, McGee, Abby and Ziva. Sincerely, SchwartzPadre (talk) 16:44, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

As I said, I didn't have time to change the rest of the names when I went through. Referring to characters by their first names is an issue throughout Wikipedia. As an encyclopaedia we're supposed to be neutral in the way we treat everything. Fictional characters should be treated as objects. Humanising fictional characters by referring to them by their first names, except where necessary, isn't being neutral. It's falling into the trap of referring to fiction "in-universe". Have you read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)? Regarding the image, I don't see a problem with using an image in the infobox, provided that any non-free images meet the requirements of WP:NFCC. --AussieLegend (talk) 17:05, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Infobox skyscraper

Responded on my talk page. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:01, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Responded again. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:16, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Courtney Henggeler

According to the article's log, this article was deleted in 2009 and then restored last March per a request at WP:REFUND. The edit you quoted in the AFD was the restoring admin removing the PROD tag "after" undeleting it. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 19:20, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I (obviously) hadn't bothered to check the log. --AussieLegend (talk) 02:16, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a study

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to Main Study. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates about 20 minutes. I chose you as a English Wikipedia user who made edits recently through the RecentChange page. Refer to the first page in the online survey form for more information on the study and me.cooldenny (talk) 02:32, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Removal of Good Luck Charlie reference

I could understand that the reference is a fansite, which is a non-no on Wikipedia. But still it showed an actual photo of the script for the particular episode, clearly showing the episode title, director, writer and production code. I would have removed myself, if the photo wasn't there. But hey, Djaa995 posted it anyway. QuasyBoy 08:09, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Possible Verizon Vandal sightings

I am not sure whether this person is the VV, but they are using the same MO. What do you think?

• Ploomese25007 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• PopperSauce25007 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Elizium23 (talk) 22:39, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Clearly the Verizon Vandal. The massive amounts of overlinking, changing random words and this edit, changing names to "Chanel" are typical. Materialscientist has already blocked both editors. --AussieLegend (talk) 02:56, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Verizon vandal

Hi AussieLegend,

I am currently working on an abuse filter to try to prevent at least some types of her edits.

Regards, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:29, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I'd really appreciate it, although just blocking Verizon completely would be good too. --AussieLegend (talk) 05:31, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, I would feel uncomfortable blocking any range larger than /24 for months. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:21, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I know, a lot have people have that problem but really, it's no worse than some of the school blocks that are in place. For example, the NSW Department of Education and Training caters for tens of thousands of school students in NSW but its IP addresses have been regularly blocked for up to a year at a time, resulting in a similar effect to what a block of Verizon's pool would. I took the trouble to raise an abuse report and Verizon was notified of the outcome but so far, has done nothing. Obviously, it doesn't care if its IPs are blocked but maybe, if its customers started complaining about not being able to access Wikipedia, it would force it to do something so we don't have to. I don't think the collateral damage would be that bad if it were blocked, the Verizon Vandal's edits are 42.3% of the total edits from Verizon. --AussieLegend (talk) 07:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

It's different: with schools it's a public place, so they can just go back home to create an account to edit. But if we block a commercial ISP range, we're blocking people at their own homes. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:23, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The Schneider Vandal

I'd like to report a vandalism, A unregistered user with the IP adress, 189.71.30.121, Vandalized the page for Drake & Josh, check the history. I'd suggest blocking the page from unregistered users to possibly prevent another travesty like this one The WikiSpector (talk) 20:54, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Ying Yang Yo or Ying Yang You

Hi AussieLegend! :) I'm a little confused...What is the difference? as In which one did Mitchel Musso appear in...? -- MelbourneStar☆ ^{(talk to me)} 04:52, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

No don't worry. I found My mistake. I swear I'm half asleep today :/ -- MelbourneStar☆ ^{(talk to me)} 04:54, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Puck

How about you discuss it on the talk page, rather than continuously reverting. CTJF83 13:40, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually, since you were the one who chose to remove the name in the first place, and then reverted the restoration of the status quo, it's really you who should have started discussing, as per WP:BRD. --AussieLegend (talk) 13:43, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I laugh at essays....but I'll start it, headed to bed after I start it, so I'll respond to what ever you and others type later. CTJF83 13:45, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

On second thought, it only says "Noah" twice, it's not like you changed every mention of "Puck" to "Noah" CTJF83 13:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I only restored what has been in the article for a while. --AussieLegend (talk) 13:52, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad we could reach an agreement so easily! :) CTJF83 13:54, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

We must be doing something wrong. --AussieLegend (talk) 14:00, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

LOL CTJF83 21:25, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for correcting my mistake in Kensi Blye's entry in NCIS Los Angeles. Sorry, I got confused because the first two episodes were aired the same day. --78.53.46.75 (talk) 04:13, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Just curious

When was the last time you made an edit that wasn't some sort of reversion? -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 10:58, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

I make them all the time. However, most of the edits I make are janitorial in nature, whether that be reversion of vandalism,[2] cleaning up articles,[3]removal of original research,[4] or something altogether different. Sometimes I even get thanked for it,[5][6] although thanks is not necessary. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:29, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Can you unblock me from Miley Cyrus awards page

I know I have had some mistakes with the page, but those are legally hers too.She is Hannah Montana but your acting like their two different people.She should have those awards on the page.Her name is apart of the award because she plays the character.Also, I didn't ruin the page, I just added extras, you ruined the page for the shake it up episodes page.You got a second chance and didn't get blocked, but you blocked me from miley's page when I didn't even ruin the whole page.Please unblock me!Also, put the awards that the show and movies she done on the page, its her awards too, she played the character and was apart of the show/movies and it has her name on the stuff.She should get credit for it.Once again please unblock me!--Asianandy (talk) 11:10, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid a lot of what you've said doesn't make a lot of sense. I didn't block you from "Miley's page" at all (I can't). Nobody can edit List of awards and nominations received by Miley Cyrus at the moment as it's fully protected until 17 May because of edit-warring. I never said you ruined the page, I don't think I've even looked at that page until now. As for List of Shake It Up episodes, I've made very few links there and they've all been to fix the page (removal of vandalism, unsourced data, bad links etc) so I don't appreciate you saying I ruined it. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Infobox protected area

I have helped maintain the template {{Infobox protected area}} in the past and I have noticed that there has been a discussion about merging {{Infobox protected area}} and {{Infobox protected area of Australia}}. I have been working on a version of {{Infobox protected area}} that might help if a merger goes forward. I hope that you can join the discussion here. –droll [chat] 00:57, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

File:ANTFarmCast.jpg

Apparently, there is a user who joined less than a month ago on Wikipedia who keeps on attempting to get the ANT Farm cast photo removed when it is clearly reasonable to put on the page and will not stop trying to get it deleted. Could we do something about this? --DisneyFriends (talk) 22:46, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Sonny With a Chance (So Random!)

I understand your argument, and I'm willing to stop because of your persuasive argument, as long as someone (eventually) creates a So Random! page (by itself), or someone changes the name of the article. Also, since the new logo is officially released, can we use that for the Sonny With a Chance page? Or should we just wait till we create a separate So Random! page? - DCupdates11 (talk) 16:22, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The current article is titled Sonny with a Chance and, with the exception of news about season 3, everything is about that program. including the logo in the infobox. So far, no episodes of So Random have aired; all we have is a date, so using the logo for So Random! would be inappropriate. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:15, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay. But once episodes of the show do air, or a new page is created, then can we use the logo? And by the way I favor the phrase you put on your user page, that states " I'm not a brain surgeon so I wouldn't edit an article on Neurosurgery. I'm not a mechanic so I wouldn't edit the Internal combustion engine article. I wouldn't even do something relatively minor like edit the Pacific Internet page because I've never used that ISP." -DCupdates11 —Preceding undated comment added 04:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC).

Once episodes air we'll be able to make a decision on what to do and we can't really do much until then without resorting to original research. Keep in mind that MOS:TV requires that articles show the entire history of a program so we have to give appropriate weight to "Sonny with a Chance" in any action. This is why we're probably going to have to create a separate article that focuses on So Random! separately, and that is where the logo would be used. --AussieLegend (talk) 05:09, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay, sounds good. DCupdates11 —Preceding undated comment added 16:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC).

The Big Bang Theory

I have an idea to give each episode it's own article. Send me some feedback if you like the idea and would like to assist. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 15:03 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Can you really establish notability for every episode? --AussieLegend (talk) 05:58, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

SWAC

I think it's time to return to Talk:Sonny with a Chance. My view is that there's good enough sourcing to settle the article naming issue, and if we get a consensus on it, we can probably get this edit-warring cleared up. Because I've expressed an opinion, I really can't protect anything myself ... against the rules.—Kww(talk) 22:17, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

SWAC & SR!

Can I ask how Sonny with a Chance and So Random! isn't in the same predicament as JONAS and JONAS L.A. From what I've read in the Talk Page on the Main SWAC section, it follows just like Jonas and Jonas L.A. The cast is the same, just set in a different location. SWAC is the same, just focuses on So Random. I don't see why 117Avenue made those changes to both the List of Episodes and the Main page without discussing before taking them off. The official video on the Official Disney Channel Youtube states "A Brand new Season" which would indicate it's still part of SWAC. The first episode is called Episode 301 which takes place after 225 otherwise wouldn't it be Episode 101? Any input? - Alec2011 (talk) 01:15, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Also according to this, it states a new Season of So Random! - Alec2011 (talk) 20:39, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately that video isn't available outside the US so I can't see it. The Futon Crtic has So Random! listed as a new series.[7] --AussieLegend (talk) 06:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

How can the other people get away with using it saying the things they did to make it it's own page? I don't really trust that as a source as nothing of relevance is listed after the episode aired. I know it is reliable, but still it doesn't show any episdoes, prod. codes, except for what's already been posted.

I also like how people made a new page when the current SWAC page currently states this:

It was announced on November 12, 2010 that the third season would begin production without Lovato, due to her recovering from health issues. The series would now focus on the sketch/comedy/music-variety show So Random!, centering around guest stars, sketches, digital shorts, and musical performances, a similar format to Saturday Night Live. Production of the third season began on January 30, 2011.

On April 19, 2011, People.com reported that Lovato would not be returning for the third season. As a result, the show will be renamed So Random! and focus only on the sketches than the behind-the-scenes antics. As a result of Lovato's departure from Sonny with a Chance, the series is the second Disney Channel original series to have its lead actor/actress leave during the series' run (after So Weird), and the fourth Disney Channel series to have a main cast member leave the series during its run (with That's So Raven and Jonas L.A. also included). All of these indicates it's a third season not a spin-off. - Alec2011 (talk) 05:10, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

All of the sources are several months old. Recent reliable sources point to So Random! having been retooled into a separate series in subsequent months. Even the Disney source, dated 16 May 2011, refers to "the comedy series "So Random!".[8] The link that identified the first episode as episode 301 is no longer available.[9] All evidence poits to So Random! being a new series. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Which can be found here. - Alec2011 (talk) 15:34, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Template:Infobox television

After this edit I invite you to Template talk:Infobox television#Nowrap List of episodes. 117Avenue (talk) 17:43, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

MythBusters non-episode myths

Fine, if you're really that concerned about it, why don't you find and get rid of all the other myths that weren't featured in the episodes? There are already plenty, so there's no harm whatsoever in adding another one. I thought I made that quite clear. AdventureCaverns (talk) 17:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

As I made clear, the articles are about television episodes and non-television content doesn't belong in them, especially since the non-TV content lacks sources, or attribution to a reliable source, as is required by Wikipedia:Verifiability. --AussieLegend (talk) 01:46, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Protect Question?

Did I do [[10]] right? The article said to post this in the page as a request for people to see it, but 177avenue said that's not what that's for. I red in the Silver-Protection article that you can post that for a request and/or make a request at that page. - Alec2011 (talk) 17:52, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

117Avenue was correct. The edit you made was a request for somebody to edit a semi-protected page for you, not a request for protection itself. To request page protection you need to visit Wikipedia:Requests for page protection and follow the instructions there. Or, if you use Twinkle (I'm guessing you don't though) all the hard work is done for you. --AussieLegend (talk) 01:58, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. I guess that page didn't explain it very well. - Alec2011 (talk) 02:44, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

So Random!

Thank you for back-up. I red your posts on their page. Great job, I agree with you. They are out of control. I know the 3-Revert rule, I stated that to them about it. I made a request to Semi-Protect both pages to help with the vandalism. As of right now, there's too much "OR" being posted and they don't care. Thanks for the back-up. Disney Channel Media Net is an official Disney website, I don't see how they don't get that. Also not everyone can see the promo since it's only in US. Can you see the Zap2It schedule? - Alec2011 (talk) 04:11, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, zap2it is no problem. The only site that seems to be an issue is cbspressexpress. The claim that Disney Channel Media Net is a "fan sight"[sic] really blew me away, as did the claim that he'd added a reference for the claim in So Random! at List of So Random! episodes, especially since he didn't add a reference at all. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:15, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I know. He even used that site as a reference, and he still said it's not a reliable source. This seems to resemble another user on here that was stubborn with DC edits. All in all, what needed to be taken care of has been taken care of. My reference for "Episode 301" being correct was reliable, until it's posted on a TV listings. Do TV listings count as sometimes they change at the last minute sometimes. - Alec2011 (talk) 04:35, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

When I saw him use that site as a reference I was amazed. Regarding sources, TVGuide is especially bad at changing episodes around. I don't think any source is really reliable all of the time and often, different "reliable" sources contradict each other, as has happened here. Sometimes it can be better to just sit back and wait to see what eventuates. It happens all the time at List of The Penguins of Madagascar episodes. I still don't think we've got it right with So Random! because of the conflicts. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:43, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

It also doesn't help that Disney hasn't released anything about it being a spin-off, but that it is it's own show without the behind-the-scenes details. All that has heppen in OR and "this is going to happen and this is the correct info." Which is why I wanted to keep all the So Random@! things as the SWAC page becuase Disney never said it was a Spin-off so we would just add everything under Season 3 of SWAC, but I guess this works a lot better. It's just the people posting information that us (trusted editors) have added and they don't like it, because it's not what they think is right. - Alec2011 (talk) 17:48, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I know that I have no "reliable" sources, but living in the U.S., they've released the So Random! promo with clips and stills of the 5 original members excl. Demi Lovato, stating at the end of the promo "Get ready for an all new season of So Random! premiering Sunday, June 5th 8/7c on Disney Channel." — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChadDylanCooper (talk • contribs) 02:29, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Castle Episode Guide

I wanted to request permission to change your summary of the last episode on Castle Season 3. None of the other summaries give away the endings but this one does. I saw that you mentioned not to change it only because I think it is a spoiler but I believe it is as you don't really have to watch the episode after reading your summary. I don't mean any disrespect, I just think that these summaries shouldn't ruin it for someone who hasn't seen it. Let me know what you think. I will keep it how you had it until we talk. Thanks for your consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil48875 (talk • contribs) 06:05, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

This has been discussed at Talk:List of Castle episodes#WP:Spoiler. As per WP:SPOILER it is not acceptable to delete information from an article because you think it spoils the plot. The article has now been semi-protected specifically to stop this type of edit. --AussieLegend (talk) 07:09, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

But do you notice how none of the other summariee give away the ending? I saw what you said about how leaving out the end is no different than leaving out the beginning but thats not true. People who havent seen it or arent sure if theyve seen want to look at this list to get an idea of the episode without having the ending ruined for them. In respect to the rest of the episode guide i think it should be changed to something similar. Would you want someone to give away the ending to something you wanted to see before you saw it? I dont know you so i dont know how you feel about this. But i would think the majority of people wouldnt want someone telling them before they watched it. If you arent willing to let it be changed to something a little more mysterious, would you at least consider putting spoiler tags on it? Because lets face it...what you have written now is the definition of a spoiler. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil48875 (talk • contribs) 08:45, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

This was the season finale and the shooting and Castle telling Beckett he loved her were significant elements of the cliff-hanger so the inclusion is justified. This is an encyclopaedia, not a fansite. We treat subjects neutrally and don't concern ourselves with spoilers. Nor do we include disclaimers, as per WP:NODISCLAIMERS. If you have an issue with the content, you need to discuss it at Talk:List of Castle episodes#WP:Spoiler. Here is not the appropriate place. --AussieLegend (talk) 09:13, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay, that is fine. I didn't mean any disrespect, I just feel that the summaries should be similar in format and Knockout's isn't the same. This is the last post I will make on your page. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil48875 (talk • contribs) 11:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Invalid reversion

Not sure why you felt the need to make this reversion [11] given that the edit posted by user:BenM was information displayed onscreen in the season finale. Unless your reversion was based solely on what appeared in the edit summary (which is arguably WP:OR, but did not appear in the actual edit, and which arguably is also exempted by WP:CALC). -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 21:19, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: May 2011

Hello! Well, I always mark my edits on pages as being "minor edits". Now, the reason as to why I do that is because I just feel the need to mark two boxes when I am finished editing a page: "Minor Edit" and "Watch this page". So, I have a perfect solution, for this problem: Wikipedia should introduce a "Major Edit" button! What do you think? Cheers! Mozzyepic24 .(Talk). 21:09, 25 May, 2011. (UTC).

Or, you could just not click on "minor edit" unless your edit actually is minor, just like everyone else does. Minor edits are the exception, rather than the rule and marking edits as minor, just because you fell the need to check a box, is inappropriate. --AussieLegend (talk) 02:48, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

New articles

As someone who has a great deal of experience on Wikipedia, would you mind looking over and possibly rating a couple new articles I've created? I want to make sure I didn't miss anything, and have a third party read over and fix anything I may have done wrong. The articles can be found at Burn Notice: The Fall of Sam Axe and "Pilot (White Collar)". Thanks! Kevinbrogers (talk) 04:32, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Seeing double

Re. TW

That might be, because you've got Twinkle enabled as a 'gadget' in preferences, and you have an entry in User:AussieLegend/monobook.js. As the new version probably uses a new js, I suggest you try just removing;

importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkle.js');

Dunno if that'll work, but try it. If it sorts out your problem, please update Wikipedia talk:TW#Seeing double.

Note: I'm no expert in Twinkle code; just wondered if that might help. Best,  Chzz  ►  04:07, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

That fixed it. Thanks. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:45, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

So Random! Logo

Hey, I just wanted to point out that the logo on the So Random! page was actually fan-made/generated and its not actually the exact one used for the show. Would it still be allowed to be used? --DisneyFriends (talk) 15:55, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

If it's not official we shouldn't be using it. --AussieLegend (talk) 16:09, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Caught ya

You wouldn't be trying to reduce the usage count of that parameter now, would you? LordVetinari (talk) 14:55, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

No, I was removing realestateview.com.au as per our earlier discussion but I gave up. Steakdig has been far too busy. --AussieLegend (talk) 15:32, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Desktop

Everytime i press the "show desktop" button for a second time it opens my last browsing page again. Is that normal? Its acted like that for a week. Also, my cursor finds it difficult to slide pages down or up lately. Any ideas? Pass a Method talk 06:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Disney Channel Revision

I was wondering what your opinion is on this revision by User:Dcupdates11. I am almost 100% positive that what he is trying to add is not formatted correctly, extraneous information, and not necessary for the article. The summer articles were removed and probably should not be mentioned in the history. Thank you for your help! (I am consulting you because I know you have had problems with this user before as well.) --DisneyFriends (talk) 00:55, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

There are certainly some errors and, like most of what he adds, there is some personal commentary involved. --AussieLegend (talk) 03:31, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

thx for the whale wars update

thx for the whale wars update :^) Arkangel lucifer (talk) 08:12, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

31 May 2011 Australian House of Representatives

Hey. I appreciate that your "Wikipedia philosophy" is opposed to people who are not experts editing an article, but as a Parliamentarian (an officer of an organization who is entrusted to explain parliamentary procedure to the Chair) as well as a keen observor of British and Australian parliamentary debate, I believe it is of significant historical interest to record the somewhat peculiar events on 31 May 2011 in the Australian House of Representatives, where the Speaker (for only the second time in history) was overruled on a matter of his authority (in naming the unruly member) AND which did not lead to his resignation, but rather an even more unusual motion of confidence, moved by the very Leader of the Opposition who led the "No" vote just minutes earlier. It is certainly a significant event, in that it alters the established conventions with regards to the Speaker's authority. Please leave the changes as they are or else provide compelling reasons to remove them. ExcaliburPrime1 (talk • contribs) 05:08, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The compelling reasons were expressed in the edit summaries. Wikipedia is not Hansard or a news service. We don't report every little thing that happens in parliament, only those that are most relevant. Concentrating on one issue is giving that issue undue weight, which is against Wikipedia's policy of maintaining a neutral point of view. For the record, I know Bob Baldwin and vote for him, but I have to abide by Wikipedia's policies, and so do you. --AussieLegend (talk) 05:48, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree with you in as far as Bob Baldwin, MP is concerned, and have removed the update from his page. This matter is minor (and thus given undue weight to be included) as concerns him, particulary when neither Hansard nor the media reported on just what he said to be "named." As for the update of the "Speaker of the Australian Parliament" and "Harry Jenkins" pages, I feel that the event is important enough and the label of undue weight is unwarranted. I refer you to the second bullet point under "Impartiality" in the Speaker article, which mentions a similar situation in 1975 (although in that case the Government voted against the Speaker,) as well as the mention of that same event in 1975 in Speaker Jim Cope's page. In those events, a similar situation was deemed worthy of noting, and I feel it is not undue weight to include a similar notation here. --ExcaliburPrime1 (talk • contribs) 06:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Can you help?

Can you stop by here again? Thanks -- 91.64.228.147 (talk) 16:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I read your answer. Have tried to explain. -- 91.64.228.147 (talk) 21:39, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Testing

Hi there. Could I suggest that you use your userspace for testing purposes instead of the mainspace? Thanks. —Mike Allen 00:18, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, what I was testing doesn't work in userspace, otherwise I would have. --AussieLegend (talk) 00:25, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I assume it was this test? You could have linked to it your edit summary so I or someone else would know what kind of testing was taking place. :P No worries. —Mike Allen 00:27, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Disney Channel Original Series

Can you help me? There's this person with the IP address of (74.193.177.138) that keeps moving things around without a reference. They don't have a Talk Page. Not sure if I should make one for them or not. What can I do to stop the vandalism? - Alec2011 (talk) 03:44, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:NACTOR question?

Hey Aussie Legend. I'm still fumbling around here and trying to work thinghs out as I go so I'd appreciate you cluing me in on a few things. In the case of (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Goran_D._Kleut) and his potential deletion.. What constitutes a notable play or series of plays? Does it need to be with a large group say the Sydney theatre Company? Does it need to attract media coverage in the main media stream ie noted on tv, national newspapers not smaller regional papers or specialist media streams? Also if this page is deleted is it trully deleted or just hidden or sidelined pending further additions that make it noteworthy? my listing is nance1309 in the discussion so far but I didn't want to clutter up that discussion by my learning as I go. Sir Nancelot 04:13, 12 June 2011 (UTC) (hope my id came up correctly there). Oh and my interest in this case is that I am an actor myself and although I know I am not near the point of inclusion on Wiki I have worked with Goran a number of times and honestly thought that he was at that point so thought he'd be a good benchmark for minimum roles/ and productions for inclusion. Finally I haven't worked out how to set up my talk page yet so If you don't mind leaving your response here for a day or so before deletion I'd appreciate that Sir Nancelot 04:17, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, AussieLegend. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Goran D. Kleut.
Message added 10:17, 13 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FYI Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:17, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

images

I've uploaded the cover of NCIS Season 8! Can you see if everything is correct. I do not do often. Maybe you can cover for the NCIS Season 1-3 upload? Thank you -- LAW CSI (talk) 12:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

There were a few minor tweaks needed but it was pretty close. --AussieLegend (talk) 02:42, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit Summary

For this, you didn't reverse my edit, you undid a different edit. I removed an unsourced sentence from the music section. Check your edits before you write your summaries. Darrenhusted (talk) 15:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

According to the edit history, in addition to removing the unsourced content, your edit removed "one" from "Six people stand there, all but one - a masked man in hat and trenchcoat" and turned "[[YouTube]]" into "[[]]".[12] My edit summary was appropriate. I suggest you preview your own edits before saving, as this isn't the only peculiar edit that you've made recently. You seem to be randomly removing text for no obvious reason.[13][14] --AussieLegend (talk) 15:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Sir, kindly check episode numbering of Mythbusters 2011 season. It starts with number 160 while 2010 season also ended with episode 160. Amzimuthis (talk) 16:56, 22 June 2011 (UTC) Amzimuthis

Mitchel Musso

Sorry, AussieLegend, but what is this reffering to exactly? Thanks, -- MelbourneStar☆ ^{(talk to me)} 09:37, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Verifiability requires that "all material added to articles must be attributable to a reliable, published source appropriate for the content in question", not that it has to have references. In the case of the content that you removed,[15] there was a link to the relevant article (PrankStars), which includes a citation (it's the only one in the article - but that's another issue) confirming the content. While the citation wasn't at Mitchel Musso, the content was still "attributable to a reliable, published source appropriate for the content in question", so it met the requirements of Wikipedia:Verifiability. I've copied the citation to Mitchel Musso as a matter of convenience but since the claim was so easily verifiable, not that easy verification is a requirement, it should never have been removed. --AussieLegend (talk) 10:01, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

PrankStars

Am I wrong to say that PrankStars is not a Disney Channel Original Series? I mean DisneyFriends has stated that it's an original series when the Press Release states nothing of it being a Disney Channel Original Series. The only thing any source states is that it's "a series airing on Disney Channel." Also shows that are released as an "original series" get press releases stating it's in production, or pre-production whereas PrankStars was only announced as a series "airing on Disney Channel." What are your thoughts? - Alec2011 (talk) 07:57, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Warehouse 13

Yes, it is very notable for a science fiction series to include an openly gay character and if details like a character's deaf sister or that he's a fan of a particular (non-existent) comic book or that another character's father owns a bookstore or the name of her ferret then there is absolutely no reason why a character's sexuality can't be mentioned. The information was removed under false accusation of vandalism and its continued removal stinks of censorship. Matty Dean (talk) 02:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

As I suggested in my edit summary, this should be discussed on the article's talk page. There's clearly some opposition to inclusion of the content, so it's best to discuss it. It has nothing to do with censorship. --AussieLegend (talk) 03:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Of course it does. If I went into the article and stripped out mention of the attraction between Lattimer and Bering or the "chemistry" between Donovan and Fargo it would be reverted in an instant. Content that's considered standard for straight characters has to be battled for when it comes to queer characters. It's a double standard and it is unquestionably censorship. Matty Dean (talk) 05:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

The content you speak of has already happened on-screen. So far we haven't seen a single episode with this new character. If we were to include the content you suggest it would certainly be a double standard to apply a more restrictive standard to heterosexual characters. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:14, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Stop the lies and attacks

I have been attacked and lied about by one editor after another. I'm sick of it. I don't know what your problem is but the attacks and the lies need to stop. Now. Matty Dean (talk) 02:50, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Nobody is attacking you and nobody has lied. Cluebot's reversion as vandalism was obviously incorrect, but others have opposed inclusion. Don't take it personally. --AussieLegend (talk) 03:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Calling a reliable source unreliable is a lie. Repeated accusations of vandalism are attacks. Matty Dean (talk) 05:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'd call OUT magazine unreliable but it's certainly pro-gay so there are some concerns about its neutrality. Cluebot saw your edit as possible vandalism, that was a mistake. Another editor saw you revert an anti-vandal bot without explanation and assumed it was vandalism. That was a good faith mistake. No attacks were made. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:14, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

"Edit warring"

The only reason it looks like I'm "edit warring" whatever that is, is because no fewer than four different editors, including you, not to mention a robot, have ganged together to keep valid information out of the article. So while you're going around slapping crap warnings on people be sure you slap a few on the gangup artists. Or is it OK to "edit war" as long as you can get three or four other people to go in with you on it? Matty Dean (talk) 03:01, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

What you have done is the very definition of edit warring. You'll note that the warning I left on your page, as a courtesy, says "Do not edit war even if you believe you are right." At this point it's best to discuss. --AussieLegend (talk) 03:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

It must be nice to be able to censor information out of the article and then claim that it should be talked out when I had tried hours earlier to start that discussion. Matty Dean (talk) 05:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

By the time you started your discussion you had been reverted four times. You should have started the discussion three hours earlier. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:14, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I should never have been reverted at all and I especially shouldn't have been reverted BY YOU after the discussion had started. There is no justification for removing this valid information and all this smoke-blowing about reverting and what-not is irrelevant to that simple truth. Matty Dean (talk) 20:06, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

The point is that you were reverted by Cluebot and your revhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AussieLegend&action=editersion without explanation is what caused subsequent reversions. Your actions looked vandalistic and you should have started the discussion after the first reversions. I've never reverted you. I'd suggest you take your own advice and "stop the lies" if you weren't already blocked as a sockpuppet. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Image question

Hi there. I was wondering about an image recently added to Britt Robertson. It looks to me like a professional image, so I wanted to check on it. When I click on it, the file does not exist. It is sourced to a wallpapers website: http://im01.galawallpapers.net/. Am I missing something here? What to do? Thanks! --Logical Fuzz (talk) 20:48, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

The image was uploaded to commons, which is why you couldn't see any details. It has now been deleted. --01:05, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch. That always confuses me. I'm just not good with images! Much appreciated! --Logical Fuzz (talk) 07:48, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

why i distrust tv.com a little bit more and agree with you a little bit more than i did yesterday...

I don't normally agree with you on most things but accuracy... tv.com has declared that Lost Girl (TV series) is an American show because it will soon be shown on Syfy even though they are one season behind the Canadian broadcast. You say you contribute there so you should be able to look at it if you want and see what i mean. Edits of such as restricted to "the editor" of the show so it was absolutely intentional to make that change. My being a fan of Canadian tv and your distrust of tv.com have us somewhat in agreement right now. Sad because Lost Girl is the only prime-time show that is entirely a Canadian production and has zero American input and it is really popular and quite good. So of course they have to claim it on the most popular American tv website. This is one of those things that i meant when i said tv.com has moderators (and editors) who are idiots and will approve nonsense. So much for accuracy of tv.com. I might have been a little bit too harsh the other day. Sorry. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 20:38, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Albion Park Rail

Could you point out to Xposya (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Albion Park Rail and Shellhabour are both suburbs of Wollongong metropolitan area even though they are located in the City of Shellhabour LGA. Very much like Blacktown which is an LGA but is a suburb of Sydney metropolitan area. Bidgee (talk) 11:58, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, I was just looking at doing that right now. --AussieLegend (talk) 12:01, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Cool, I've just given up on a way of explaining it to them. I see that I'm being stalked again. Bidgee (talk) 12:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Request for a file move

Hey, there is a file that needs to be moved: [[File:Cover.jpeg]] I wasn't sure how to request a move, so I went to you. Thanks! --DisneyFriends (talk) 13:10, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I've moved it to File:Disney We Can Change the World cover.jpeg and resized it to comply with WP:NFCC. --AussieLegend (talk) 14:15, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Cherry Ripe - Infobox Owner

Hey AussieLegend, it's me again! I've just realized that I edited back your edit on the Cherry Ripe article. I didn't mean to do this as I'm currently editing a few articles at once and thought I must had forgotten to change it or cancelled it or something. Please forgive!

However, can you maybe explain a little more on your reason for your edit? I'm just confused as what classifies as the "owner" of a product, cause there's Kraft Foods Inc. which owns Cadbury plc which owns Cadbury UK and there's Kraft Foods Australia Pty Ltd, which owns Cadbury Australia...? AnimatedZebra (talk) 13:03, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I've already addressed this on your talk page. --AussieLegend (talk) 13:06, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Macedonian in Australia

Vandalism [16]? Macedonian is a real language. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 12:32, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

It's not one of the most commonly spoken languages in Australia though. Macedonians have been vandalising Demographics of Australia, and other articles, for quite some time now. See Talk:Demographics of Australia#Sneaky vandalism for more. --AussieLegend (talk) 12:38, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Chocolate naming.

Hello AussieLegend.

Sorry to bother you but can I ask your opinion on something?

Do you know if the "Types of chocolate" page should have the word "chocolate" capitalized or not? I know I could've posted on its discussion page but it's kinda quiet there and seeing as your pretty good at editing (or aren't you? O.o), I thought I'd ask. AnimatedZebra (talk) 12:39, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization) it shouldn't be capitalised. --AussieLegend (talk) 12:42, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! AnimatedZebra (talk) 16:12, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

templates

Hello, good stuff on NSW council templates; perhaps I should have moved them, would have saved you some work Regards (Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)).

Glee Project Teenage Dream

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTwBsJr7bZ8 Youtube videos are not meant to be used as sources, and cannot be. However, Oxygen has it up as well. This qualifies under WP:V. If it doesn't, EVERY SINGLE music video and homework assignment mentioned in the article would require a source, as only video is evidence. 99.162.156.148 (talk) 23:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Verifiability requires "that all quotations and anything challenged or likely to be challenged be attributed in the form of an inline citation that directly supports the material." While the video may be evidence, it still needs to attributed with an inline citation. There's nothing stopping YouTube videos being used as a source if they don't breach copyright. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

The video was uploaded by the official channel of the show. That does not breach copyright. You are more than welcome to cite it if you want. I have not quite grasped how to cite, even after 5 years. 99.162.156.148 (talk) 01:17, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Cookie

Purplewowies has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

You are one of the most awesome editors that edits articles that I also frequently edit, and I just wanted to give you a cookie! - Purplewowies (talk) 21:04, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Regarding Nickandmore

On the Jessie page, I used Nickandmore as a reference because it directly pulled the actual press release from the upfront and put it on its website. I don't have access to archives of the press releases on Disney Channel Medianet so I wasn't able to put the link on Wikipedia on time. --DisneyFriends (talk) 15:16, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I just found the press release on Disney Channel Medianet. I am going to revert your edit but change the reference to the appropriate links. --DisneyFriends (talk) 15:18, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Wow, I just blamed myself for putting that up but I never put it up. >.< Anyway, I fixed it regardless. --DisneyFriends (talk) 15:20, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Sydney Harbour Bridge

I need a reputable source? I work on the bridge. Mate, show me the 'reputable source' that backs up the fact that the bridge is painted from one side to the other. Think about it, if that were the case, one end would look like complete rubbish by the time they get to the other side. It's simply not true. Hence me writing "a common misconception". Whatever, buddy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.198.40.99 (talk) 16:57, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Wikipedia editors don't count as reliable sources. What you added constitutes original research and is not permitted. --AussieLegend (talk) 17:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Then how did such nonsense get there in the first place... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.198.40.99 (talk) 04:37, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Sometimes it slips through, but that's no excuse to add more. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:18, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

PrankStars?

Would you consider PrankStars a Disney Channel Original Series when it doesn't have the Disney Channel Original Series logo at the end of the show like the rest of the Shows on Disney Channel. I just think it's a show Disney is airing on the Channel that featured Disney stars, like Studio-DC. - Alec2011 (talk) 22:25, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't really understand how Disney determines which of their series qualify as "Disney Channel Original Series". Merely tacking the logo onto a program surely is not the only thing that determines it. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:06, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you for keeping the So Random! page and other television show pages free of vandalism. DisneyFriends (talk) 03:56, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I try my best. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:08, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for keeping The Glee Project vandalism-free. There has been too many unnecessary edits by anonymous users lately. 07 Matthew (talk) 04:46, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Disney's Friends for Change

Hey, I did some major cleanup to the Disney's Friends for Change page. I had it on my watchlist for a long time because I wanted to make sure I got it cleaned up. I was wondering if all of the edits I made were good and if the page is cleaned up now as it should be. Thanks! --DisneyFriends (talk) 15:18, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Color Violations

I feel like I should point out that there's more than just the winning as violations. Being out and winning the homework assignment and being out both share OUT without any indication other than color to differentiate. The same goes for Winning the Homework assignment and winning and being at risk of elimination. As I said, I have a basic idea of what can be changed to make it better on my sandbox, but obviously, asterisks aren't the best. Myzou (talk) 02:45, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree. The labels should be completely unambiguous. Ideally, we should be able to eliminate the colour completely and every cell should still have an obvious meaning. Because we have to cater for sight impaired readers, this is usually best achieved by appropriate text labelling. --AussieLegend (talk) 02:50, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I give up, Tam is at it again. I'm honestly about to call an Administrator in on it. She's done this pretty much every week. Myzou (talk) 03:12, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I've posted another warning on her talk page. If she continues to edit war I'm more than willing to escalate. --AussieLegend (talk) 03:28, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Adaptations

In many series articles must be adapted to the episode list. It must be adapted so as to NCIS episodes list. I'm with CSI Season 11 and 12 started. Can you help? This is the series Criminal Minds, CSI: NY and CSI: Miami. Thank you. -- LAW CSI (talk) 10:44, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I have all Seasons of CSI adapted by MOS:HASH. -- LAW CSI (talk) 13:34, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

CSI: Miami is also adapted. -- LAW CSI (talk) 18:26, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Verizon vandal

I see that on User:AussieLegend/Project 04 you have the note "The Verizon vandal seems to have gone quiet for now". Alas, no longer so: see Special:AbuseLog/5211097. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:42, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

WoWP: Justin's Back In

You may not be able to use YouTube videos as sources, but (WP:LINKVIO removed) confirms the guest appearence of Tim Conway. --DanTD (talk) 13:34, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Linking to copyright violations is not permitted anywhere on Wikipedia, including talk pages. --AussieLegend (talk) 17:18, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Be that as it may, it still confirms my previous edit. ----DanTD (talk) 21:15, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't matter.The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true. This is a core policy of Wikipedia. --AussieLegend (talk) 05:21, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

The video is of an actual promo. Even if you don't use it as a source, at least keep it in mind. ----DanTD (talk) 13:14, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

It's pointless to keep it in mind. Everything in the article needs to be verifiable. --AussieLegend (talk) 13:17, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry I don't have anything better. If you don't want to use it, fine. But that still doesn't make it false. ----DanTD (talk) 01:59, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Nobody was saying that it's false, just that it's not verifiable, which means it doesn't go in the article. --AussieLegend (talk) 03:31, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

UPDATE: Evidently User:Dallezam seems to be able to use a verifiable source, but I'll be damned if I know what it is. ----DanTD (talk) 02:05, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

"Related" field in Template:Infobox television

I disagree with your assessment of the instructions for Template:Infobox television, which you suggested I read in your edit summaries,[17][18][19].

Please note that in the example of Who's the Boss?, Living Dolls is listed along with The Upper Hand. The following are the descriptions given for each of the shows.

• The Upper Hand is a sitcom, produced by Central Independent Television and broadcast by ITV from 1990 to 1996. The programme was adapted from the American sitcom Who's the Boss?.
• Living Dolls is an American situation comedy featured on the fall 1989 schedule of ABC. It was a spin-off created by a writer from Who's the Boss? and featuring characters introduced during an episode of that show. The show is notable as the acting debut of Halle Berry. Both Who's the Boss? and Living Dolls were produced by ELP Communications through Columbia Pictures Television and ABC.

Similarly, Warehouse 13 and Eureka have had crossover episodes with characters from each show appearing in the other. Recently, a character from Warehouse 13 appeared on Alphas.

I do agree with you that I made a mistake putting "|chronology=" into Eureka (TV series).Austin Harper 17:17, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

The point that establishes the relationship between Who's the Boss? and The Upper Hand is that the latter "was adapted from the American sitcom Who's the Boss?". Living Dolls is stated to be a spin-off from Who's the Boss? Both of these clearly fit the criteria of "remakes, spin-offs, adaptations for different audiences". Warehouse 13, Eureka and Alphas are not remakes, spin-offs or adaptations for different audiences; they are three independent TV programs that have merely shared a couple of characters. Note that "crossover" is not one of the criteria for inclusion in "|related=". --AussieLegend (talk) 17:38, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I guess the shows are more correctly labeled as Sister shows than spin-offs. I'm going to add a reference to the three of them being related on that page, but I still think the relationship should somehow be noted on each show's article. What do you think would be the best way to do this? Austin Harper 18:34, 23 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Austin.p.harper (talk • contribs)

NCIS Season 9

Many Scores says that the 200th episode of NCIS is due to air in early 2012! Why say you that is WP:CRYSTAL??? You simply deleted "2012" by Season 9!??? -- 91.64.26.54 (talk) 17:37, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

"Due to air" and actually airing are two different things. Anything could happen in the next five months. We don't usually change from the current year until we actually have some episodes scheduled to air on known dates. --AussieLegend (talk) 17:45, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

That's comprehensible. But, then, we've to do it for every list of episodes, or?! -- 91.64.26.54 (talk) 19:36, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

ping

I emailed you about vision-impaired use of WMF projects. Tony (talk) 02:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Template Trouble

AussieLegend, as you might know i've been editing various pages related to Sydney New Year's Eve and I thought it would be better to change/update the name for Template:Infobox Sydney New Year's Eve episode. Seeing as there's already a Template:Sydney NYE TV presenter line and Template:Sydney NYE soundtrack line, it would be better (in my opinion) to rename it Template:Infobox Sydney NYE or Template:Infobox Sydney New Year's Eve but I'm not sure if this requires editing the "doc" associated with it and the category page it's listed on Category:Sydney Harbour New Year's Eve Fireworks templates. Care to help?

I'm not sure if this will break the infobox on every page it's used on but I'm currently going through them anyway, so I can fix them easily. You might also notice that some category pages related to Sydney NYE have rather long outdated names but I'm already on that case with the "Categories for discussion/Speedy" page. AnimatedZebra (talk) 14:16, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

The category page link won't show up for some reason in the above post, right before "Care to help?" but you can see it when editing...? lol AnimatedZebra (talk) 14:21, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

You need to include a colon before "Category" to display the category name (see this edit)) or else the page is added to the category. As for the Infobox itself, I think {{Infobox Sydney New Year's Eve}} would be preferable. It's just a matter of moving the template and its subpages and updating the articles. Strictly speaking it's not necessary to update the articles, as the redirect will catch it, but since there's only a few pages we may as well do that. --AussieLegend (talk) 14:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I moved the template and subpage and all is well. Thanks for the colon thing also! AnimatedZebra (talk) 18:25, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The Glee Project - whew

Hey there. Thanks for your patience with the Damian and Cameron articles. I usually stay away from reality tv and pop culture articles but for some reason I feel a responsibility towards these two. I've been trying my best to link up with my contacts in the Twitter & Tumblr community surrounding TGP in order to have them filter their sources (and possible images, :gah:) through me so that they can be added appropriately. Of course that won't solve the usual overzealous fan problem. But I'm trying. I'm a busy working mom so I don't have the time to go dig up all the sources (that are obviously out there.) But just wanted to touch base and say that I appreciate you keeping your eye on things. LoriLee (talk) 14:03, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

That '70s Show

My apologies. I was looking at the special that preceded the final episode. Did the same thing on IMDb. At least I was consistently wrong.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:59, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Looks like we both posted on each other's talk pages at the same time. --AussieLegend (talk) 01:01, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Creating an Article

AussieLegend (forgive my endless posting), I'm trying to create the Sydney New Year's Eve 2010-11 article but it already redirects to Sydney New Year's Eve, so i'm not sure. I'm also not sure wheather the hyphen "-" used in previous years is actually a hyphen or one of the various types of dashes. AnimatedZebra (talk) 01:07, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

The article you actually want to edit is Sydney New Year's Eve 2010–11, which is currently a redirect, but which you can edit by clicking here. --AussieLegend (talk) 01:26, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Air Services in NSW

I've added the air services back into the article in NSW.

I agree with your edit of stuff pertinent to just Sydney airport, but other stuff included the whole state. Montalban (talk) 06:03, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Redirected Year Dates + Dead Link

AussieLegend... *runs away from AnimatedZebra...

I was changing some image captions linking to various Sydney NYE dates and I noticed that when you click those links, say Sydney New Year's Eve 2009-10, at the top it says the page has been redirected to the same page. The only difference I can see is that the hyphen "-" is slightly longer on the heading for all Sydney NYE year dates but the address bar shows it as normal size. Am I making sense?

Also, for some reason I can't link to Sydney New Year's Eve 2010-11. AnimatedZebra (talk) 12:51, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

The articles use en dashes, not hyphens in the titles. Sydney New Year's Eve 2010-11 is actually at Sydney New Year's Eve 2010–11. I've created Sydney New Year's Eve 2010-11 as a redirect. --AussieLegend (talk) 02:30, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Aaah, I see now. So when I create the 2011-12 article, do I need use the en dash or will it automatically do it? AnimatedZebra (talk) 08:16, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

You'll need to use the en dash for the article. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:16, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

WoWP Recurring

Um,okay. I can see why you undid (Undid revision 448247754 by Silvershrek (talk)restored formatting) however,there is still an error in the formatting. That is,unless there is meant to be a huge gap between "recurring",and the actual content. Silvershrek (talk) 15:27, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Fixed --AussieLegend (talk) 02:30, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Criminal Minds Season 6 - Image

Can you tell me what is wrong here? Could you maybe fix it? Thank you! -- LAW CSI (talk) 16:24, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

It's ok! -- LAW CSI (talk) 12:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Editor's Barnstar
		For your awesome work on the article Sheldon Cooper. You quickly, effectively and skillfully removed the OR from that article, while preserving the parts relevant to the topic.Esprit15d • talk • contribs 16:45, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Impossible Pictures

Hi AussieLegend. I'm responding to your message on my own talk page regarding the PROD of Impossible Pictures, and my subsequent deletion of the links to it from other related pages. As the page was deleted but has now been re-created, my own edit log doesn't show when I proposed it for deletion, but I'm afraid you're mistaken: I proposed it on or about August 26th and didn't delete the links until after it was deleted 7 days later. I'm not quite sure where the confusion about this has come from ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 00:18, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

The reference to the misleading edit summaries refers to your deletion of links to Template:Impossible Pictures, not Impossible Pictures. The diff that I included on your talk page quite clearly show the first edit summary claiming "removed link to deleted page" at 14:20, 2 September 2011 (UTC),[20] and the PROD occurring at 14:43, 2 September 2011 (UTC),[21] 23 minutes later. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:07, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Hello AussieLegend! I hope you enjoy this cookie as an amicable greeting from a fellow Wikipedian, SwisterTwister talk 06:51, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Firework Pluralization.

AussieLegend (Oi Oi Oi), when referring to a fireworks display, should "fireworks" be pluralized?

"The two firework displays..."

OR

"The two fireworks displays..." *shrugs* AnimatedZebra (talk) 06:24, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

How many fireworks were in each display? If only one then it's "firework". If more than one, and it usually is, it's "fireworks". The other way to look at it is that it's a display of fireworks, not a display of a firework. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:27, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

It's regarding the Sydney NYE fireworks, which is too many to count so I guess it would be pluralized. Although, I wonder if the Fireworks article should be singular or plural? AnimatedZebra (talk) 06:37, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Block

User:Ashleyleggat404 has been blocked indefinitely per your AIV report. Sorry it took so long - I was at the pub, and in no state to issue blocks. Anyway, just thought I'd let you know. Keep up the good work! m.o.p 05:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

As an Aussie, I would have been disgusted if you had interrupted pub time to do anything remotely resembling work. :) Thanks for your efforts. --AussieLegend (talk) 09:08, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Haha, no worries! I'm glad you, for one, appreciate my desire to place Wikipedia after certain things. Say, this is off-topic but I'm just getting opinions - where in Australia do you think it would be best for a foreigner to visit for about a week or so? I'm looking at a short trip over Christmas break and I've always wanted to see the land down under. Any recommendations are welcome! :) m.o.p 21:24, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm 51 and I'm still trying to see everything. I only just managed to get to Western Australia in July, and that was because my 23 y.o. daughter needed her daddy to take her to see Miley Cyrus. There really is plenty to do everywhere in Australia. The drinking capital is Darwin, but there is plenty of history in the Northern Territory as well and the geography is phenomenal. The most fantastic view of the outback that I've seen was from a tower atop an escarpment 1,100 feet above sea level, with only a handful of people in the 20,100 km² (7,800 sq mi) that I could see. Of course Uluru and The Olgas are worth seeing but it's a long drive from Darwin. Perth is nice and relaxing, but I can't tell you too much because I've only spent 3 very full days there. Adelaide is nice to visit and the Barossa Valley is worth visiting if you're into wine. In 1978-80 I spent 20 months living in Melbourne and to be quite honest it never really impressed me. I visited again in 1990 for 3 weeks and in 2009 for 4 days and it actually seemed worse, which is probably whiy people call it "Melboring". Tasmania has a lot of wilderness areas. It's a small state but there's a lot of scenery and history all over the island. Canberra can be nice to visit. There's a lot of Australia in the city but if you don't know where to look, a week could be a bit longer than you need. Sydney is our busiest city and a little scary. It has most of Australia's earliest history but it is expensive and can be difficult to find your way around, even though the rail system is extensive. I live just north of Newcastle, 1hr 50 minutes by car from Sydney. It can take another hour to get the final 35km into the city centre. Where I live is no more than 45 minutes from any of the main points of interest in the Hunter Region or the Myall Lakes area. Newcastle has a lot of beaches (surfing is popular) and these continue down through the city of Lake Macquarie. All up there's about 21km of beaches in Newcastle, Lake Macquarie and Port Stephens Council, not including Stockton Beach (32km) and the swimming areas in Port Stephens and Lake Macquarie. Lake Macquarie is popular for most water sports (swimming, fishing, water-skiing, sailing etc) and with 167km of shoreline there's always somewhere that's not too crowded. although Port Stephens has a 113km shoreline, most of the population clusters around the southern shoreline and near the mouth to the north and south which is only around 31km of the shoreline. The southern shore can be pretty busy at Christmas with all the refugees from Sydney visiting. In the Hunter Valley itself, there's a lot of wine country and lots of bush walking and scenery. Although I'm a New South Welshman and it pains me to do so, WP:NPOV compels me to mention Queensland. The Gold Coast is very tourism oriented with several theme parks and lots of beaches. The Sunshine Coast is also very popular and the Great Barrier Reef is always a hit with tourists. I hope this gives you some ideas. --AussieLegend (talk) 23:05, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh, wow. That's probably the most fantastic response I've received so far! Most of the people I've asked have said "Go to Sydney and see the Opera House!" but I'd like to get more from my trip than a half-hour view of one building, as magnificent as I'm sure it is. Where's that escarpment you were talking about? Near Darwin?

I'm not too interested in tourist traps, but more of a way to see the culture, landscape and wildlife. Thanks so much for your reply by the way! m.o.p 00:27, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm not touristy myself. I find places like Port Stephens are far more interesting in the off-season. Although I've driven past it a billion times, I've never been to the Sydney Opera House. The escarpment is about 520km from Darwin by road, or 340km south in a direct line, at 15°28′22.7″S 131°17′58.9″E. The esrpment is actually 1,000ft AMSL but I climbed the 110ft tower to get the best view. Right on the edge of the escarpment is a small cave that would be great to wake up in, as it affords an incredible view from ground level. You wouldn't want to be a sleepwalker though. --AussieLegend (talk) 00:42, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Public Relations

I have responded to AussieLegend (talk) at Paul Lockyer in the Discussion and I refute his or her statement and urge the community for a revert based on misreading the policy, overkill and a lack of common sense in editing that would lead to hundreds of articles from having unfair deletions. In fact, I did not use a straight copy of the entire media release but I used a portion. Bidgee and AussieLegend have misread the policy to mistakingly believe that this policy against wholesale copy actually applies to ANY use of the press release. This is wrong! I explain why in detail at the relevant article in Discussion. Dobry (talk) 03:18, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

I have a statement of resolution over this issue at my talk page Dobry (talk) 20:20, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Any thoughts?

You are the top contributor at TBBT, so I assume you are a fan. I'm planning to start WikiProject The Big Bang Theory. Any thoughts? Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 16:55, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Saga/Arc?

I put Saga because that's what the reference stated, it didn't state Arc so I don't know why it would need to be changed. - Alec2011 (talk) 19:20, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

→

Archive 15