Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:35, 26 November 2014

Archives

Archive 1, 2, 3, 4

October 2014

Hey, Raintheone! :) I noticed that my edit was reverted in Holby City (Series 17) and was very confused as to why. However I then noticed you wrote on my talk page. I apologise for a very vague and weak edit summary and completely understand why my edit was reverted, however the episode has been officially released on a trustworthy website. (The website is a spoilers site, but includes accurate information.) Would it be okay if I redid my edit with sourced information? Thank you for correcting me, though! (AHugeHolbyandCasualtyFan (talk) 06:27, 3 October 2014 (UTC))

Your GA nomination of Miss Rosa

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Miss Rosa you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Miyagawa -- Miyagawa (talk) 08:42, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Miss Rosa

The article Miss Rosa you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Miss Rosa for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Miyagawa -- Miyagawa (talk) 08:42, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Doug Graham (Winners & Losers)

On 21 October 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Doug Graham (Winners & Losers), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Stephen Phillips originally auditioned to play the Winners & Losers character Doug Graham, but was cast as Zach Armstrong instead? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Doug Graham (Winners & Losers). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

You're wrong

Mr and Mrs Rafferty didn't adopt Niall, in fact they didn't exist, his real name was Matthew Brownlow, Jean snow fostered him but he kept his name. He told Steph and the McQueens his name was Niall Rafferty so they didn't twig on who it was, I don't see why you keep reverting all my edits? You should take up knitting if you bored instead of vandalising my edits:) ta babe! User:Ozzykins97 User talk:Ozzykins97 13:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion. Buy me some wool and I will knit. In reference to your edits to Niall Raffarty, the part which lead me to revert the edit was "Matthew McQueen (aka Niall Rafferty)" - we do not include the abbreviation "aka" in the opening sentence of the lead. Plus he was never known as Matthew McQueen on the show so suggesting otherwise is grossly misleading. It was just to bad it took the rest with it. But I should not need to explain myself - everyone knows you are User talk:Ziggyroscoe, a blocked editor.Rain the 1 13:26, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm not? And who is everyone? You and June gloom are the only ones picking on me changing all my edits it's pointless to be honest. Yeah I apologise I shouldn't of put the Matthew McQueen I just assumed that would he would of taken his mums name rather than his dads, but I was wrong and I corrected myself. User:Ozzykins97 User talk:Ozzykins97 13:50, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

And yes you should need to explain yourself if you are going to revert my edits you need a reason. ] User talk:Ozzykins97 13:52, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Quick opinion

Hello Raintheone, I just wanted your quick opinion on something soap opera character infobox-related. Do the breaks that the actor has taken in duration need to be noted next to their name in the infobox, even when no other actor had played the role in between those breaks, and it's already noted in the article and the info-box? I just find that it adds clutter. E.g. Grace Turner, nobody else played the role after Jennifer Gareis, but another editor is insistent that in this case (and for all other Y&R articles) every single break needs to be noted (I would rather just have it as 1997-2014, as the breaks are already noted in duration. Including all the actor's breaks next to their name makes "Duration" look redundant). What are your thoughts? Is it explicitly said that every single break has to be noted next to the actor's name somewhere? Sorry for the long paragraph, it's not that important but just wanted your say on this. Thanks — Arre 06:16, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Same case for Taylor Hayes (The Bold and the Beautiful) are various other articles. It just adds annoying clutter. — Arre 06:20, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply not been online. No they do not all need to be listed. Just the simplest form. For example Peter Barlow (Coronation Street) has been played most recently on and off by Chris Gascoyne but it lists (2000–14) instead of all the breaks. It is not as common that old actors come back after someone else takes the role. Then list all the dates, for example Sam Mitchell (EastEnders).Rain the 1 22:28, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, no problem. Thanks for your input. So, I think it's safe for me to go ahead and make necessary adjustments. Can you keep a look out on those 2 articles specifically in case my edits are reverted? Thanks. — Arre 08:05, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again, but I wanted to ask you also - is a caption under the infobox photo necessary for every character article? — Arre 08:21, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Not if the character has only been played by one actor. - JuneGloom Talk 16:15, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

@JuneGloom07: what about in the case of the Taylor Hayes article I linked. There was a temporary actress only who filled the role briefly; does that mean a caption is required? Also, do temporary actors need to even be noted in the info-box at all?— Arre 07:54, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

I think a caption would be helpful in Taylor's article due to her being played by two different actresses. There's a similar situation at Libby Kennedy. As for temporary actors, I think I may have made up my own rules there. In the case of Libby, her temporary recast was highly publicised and was for around 5-6 weeks. On the hand, her mother Susan was briefly played by another actress in a flashback, and I added that to the casting section, but removed it from the ibox as it was so brief and kinda non-defining. - JuneGloom Talk 16:39, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

I see. Well I have barely found anything on the temporary fill-in actress for Taylor (Really only just one source), I'm assuming it was just one episode or something. But I'm not sure. Another editor was pretty adamant the other actress be in there. I actually had a look at the Libby article, and assumed that the temp. re-cast was only in the info-box because there was quite some coverage of it. — Arre 11:03, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

It might be worth starting a discussion on the talk page if someone disagrees and gain a consensus there. If it was for one or two episodes, I'd consider removing it from the infobox and just mention it in the lead and casting. - JuneGloom Talk 17:48, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

I have been so busy. Glad to see JG has answered your questions. I totally agree, if she appeared in one episode then do not bother mentioning in the ibox. I like to keep the clutter away and all info as little as possible.Rain the 1 22:53, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again, but the same person is at it again...cluttering info-boxes with every single break in duration next to the actor's name when this info is already present, and adding irrelevant temporary actors in the info-box (Please see the Grace Turner and Taylor Hayes articles I linked). Is there anything I can even do about this? None of this is really specified in great detail in any guidelines, but this user believes that by removing clutter, I am vandalising Misplaced Pages. It's ridiculous. — Arre 23:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

I have acted for the first time tonight. I have left it alone but I noticed a clear disregard of consensus. Everyone at WP soaps knows and agreed that duration less than 12 months is not reflected. And you should start a discussion on the relevant talk pages arguing to remove non-notable stuff. I would participate in such a discussion as this has been an issue for several articles lately.Rain the 1 23:22, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I used to be willing to discuss similar things like this (It's always this same editor), but this person is never willing to budge no matter how many people are in agreement on something. They constantly accuse me of trying to own Misplaced Pages, make up my own rules and now, they're calling me a vandal. It's just silly. Oh and I just saw right now that they've reverted you already--see what I mean? There's almost no point in dealing with this, but I just can't stand the clutter which they constantly add. It's pointless and I have no idea what to do anymore. They will always revert me even when I'm just doing what has been done. — Arre 23:58, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

I just noticed that actually. They told me consensus does not matter on Misplaced Pages. How strange, I thought it was a core element of this community based collaboration. I must have been under the wrong impression all these years. TBH, I would not worry.. you have raised the issue now - editors accusing others of owning pages usually have their own agenda anyway. It appears clear to me that this particular one has adopting "my way, or the highway" approach to editing. Which does not fly on Misplaced Pages. I will alert an admin.Rain the 1 00:12, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Jonathan Kurtiss

On 7 November 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jonathan Kurtiss, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Winners & Losers producer Maryanne Carroll helped actor Damien Bodie secure the role of Jonathan Kurtiss? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jonathan Kurtiss. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Going to other editors specifically because you know they will agree with you

is NOT allowed on wikipedia. A conversation on your talk page about not following template guidelines is not allowed. The template states actors should be listed in chronological order. Period. Nothing about ignoring temps or not adding the ones Arre9 doesn't want there. You yourself stated in that very conversation that you made up your own rule. How does that make sense? Also, the duration dates are not only misleading, they're wrong. You have added incorrect information to the Taylor Hayes page. She wasn't on the show consecutively until this year. Why are you omitting correct information that guidelines specifically state need to be there and adding in wrong information that shouldn't be there? And, most importantly, why are you doing so intentionally?Cebr1979 (talk) 00:19, 26 November 2014 (UTC) My apologies, the person who made up their own rules was JuneGloom, not you, but it is in the same conversation so you can see what I meant.Cebr1979 (talk) 00:39, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Which editor did I run to because they will agree with me? I cannot give a reply until the heading is clearly explained.Rain the 1 00:26, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

That's what Arre9 does. That was clear to understand since he started the conversation on your talk page.Cebr1979 (talk) 00:29, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Well since you are keen on policy - I would like to point out that Misplaced Pages discourages personal attacks. Making a heading on another user's talk page with the aim to belittle and accuse another editor is clearly making things personal. It is clear to see you have a problem with this user. I was also under the impression that this user was a female? To address the accusation directly, I doubt Arre landed here with the knowledge that I would agree with her automatically. I took long enough to find the time to reply and secondly, me and this user have had many a difference of opinion over various article content related matters. But that is the beauty of this website, we discuss and find a middle ground. That is usually called a consensus, with others involved obvs... though according to you this does not matter. I am fair though, so I would like to ask you what the problem is, relating to article content only. Why do you need separate dates and each and every actor listed in the infobox? Anything else too. It is good to talk! :-)Rain the 1 00:41, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

• sigh* You are just being difficult... There are template guidelines that state what should be in there. I've told you that. It's not me that "needs" the info there, it's wikipedia. Because wikipedia has listed what info it wants in templates in its template guidelines. Why do you feel you can ignore that?Cebr1979 (talk) 00:51, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

I am not being difficult. Another personal comment, stick to content not editors. Misplaced Pages does not need the information there. Various old guidelines used to lead to easy deletions of Soap opera related articles. Editors like myself and countless others spent their time improving and condensing down various aspects of the articles to draw them into line with thousands of other notable and credible articles. One such area that drew many a commment was the infobox, we finally reached a surprising agreement to merge the infobox. So you can follow the outcomes of which. If you do not like the result then feel free to raise a discussion. I will be more than likely to offer my opinion there. I ignore nothing to finish.Rain the 1 01:03, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

So you're telling me you've had a conversation which completely invalidates and it's no longer relevant?Cebr1979 (talk) 01:09, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

A light guideline perhaps not updated recently because of the absence of an active admin related to the field? Please go by consensus only. I disagree with some by the way!!! But still always follow them (even when I really do not want to).. You are clutching at straws now with policy typy things that may no longer reflect. Is it really important? You could just concentrate on sourced article content and help improve a vast array of articles waiting. Your passion seems so misplaced and disruptive. It would be much more beneficial if you put such energy into creating content than dictating infobox cluttered trivia. Consider it atleast.01:19, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

You know what's frustrating? You tell me to go with consensus but, not once have you shown where this consensus conversation happened (even though I've asked). Consider that at least. Lastly, Arre9 was the one who told me to follow the template guidelines back in the day. Once I started doing that, suddenly the template guidelines were no longer relevant. So... like... which is it???Cebr1979 (talk) 01:35, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

I cannot be bothered to link it. I know my stuff. You feel the need to be the policy cop and link to what everyone knows. Bored now. Shame you cannot display the same enthusiasm searching for consensus. You just need blocking ASAP!Rain the 1 02:35, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

My talk page

Why are you making reverts on my talk page? I'm allowed to delete those messages. Don't do that again. Please review and before making violations against talk page rules again.Cebr1979 (talk) 01:14, 26 November 2014 (UTC)