User talk:Geraldo Perez/Archive 17

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

My Friends Tigger & Pooh

If it's not already, could you please add this one to your watchlist?... There's an IP editing this article that I think should have an eye kept on them. (Also, I just spent a fair amount of time whipping the article into shape, so it would be good if it could be kept that way!) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:37, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm becoming more convinced that this IP's edits are mostly disruptive. I'm starting to think that a report to AIV or ANI may be warranted here... But the editing from this IP simply does not look on the up-and-up... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:24, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: 174.80.4.82 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is just off a 60 hour block for vandalism so any further identified vandalism can be reported as resumption and lead to a longer block. He is still removing maintenance tags with no stated justification so I reported to AIV on that basis (add - now blocked for a month). Other edits are disruptive but not explicitly vandalism. He is doing a lot of drive-by tagging with no basis on why the tags were added. Also some tags that may be valid. May be WP:POINT. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:05, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Follow-up

Super Sleuth Christmas Movie, Tigger & Pooh and a Musical Too, and Super Duper Super Sleuths do not look to be independently notable enough for separate articles. Suggestions?... The most obvious course of action here would be to simply "merge" the plot sections of those articles (after likely necessary trimming) to the relevant entries in the List of My Friends Tigger & Pooh episodes#Films table, and then to convert these to redirects... (However, that's a pretty big job, which I don't expect to get to anytime soon – at least the "plot trimming" part...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: I'd just let it be even though they don't meet WP:NFILM. If you do choose to work on these a merge is the best way to handle it, but, of course, start a merge discussion on each to see if anyone has strong objections. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

70.55.72.132

IP editor 70.55.72.132 has been adding unsourced, or poorly/incorrectly sourced, future episodes to a lot of KIDSTVSHOW articles lately, to the point where I think a block is probably in order. Just letting you know, as you'll probably figure out how to handle it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Can't do much until get to a L4 warning. Need to add warning messages for adding unsourced future ep info. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

OK, I've given them a L3 for Polly Pocket (TV series). If they do it again, it'll get them to L4, and then maybe something can be done... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:24, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Spliced (TV series)

I think it may be time to ask for page protection from WP:RfPP for this one. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:34, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: I request a protect. Looks like same person and English is not likely something they are familiar with. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:45, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Extra attention

Just a heads up that I'm sure you saw coming. lol Will need extra attention on:

• Bunk'd
• List of Bunk'd episodes
• List of Disney Channel series

Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:24, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Let's add List of programs broadcast by Disney Channel to this as well, as I've just seen a pair of edits marking Bunk'd over at that article, with Disney not officially confirming the end of the series. MPFitz1968 (talk) 01:50, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Lilimar Hernandez

From the article: Lilimar Hernandez (born June 2, 2000[1]), also known mononymously as Lilimar, is a Venezuelan actress. I think we've talk about this before, but this strikes me as being a lot like the cases of Breanna Yde, Madelaine Petsch, and Sasha Pieterse – born in a foreign country, but all the relevant notable work being done in America... Is the issue here that we have no evidence that Lilimar Hernandez is a U.S. citizen?... Because, otherwise, I'd say we should call her an "American actress" or at least a "Venezuelan-born American actress" as per those other three articles... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:17, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Per MOS:BLPLEAD it should be "the country of which the person is a citizen, national or permanent resident", basically pick the one where all notable actives occurred. We mention residence in infobox to support American resident and no indication she did anything anywhere else based on credits. Proof of citizenship really not necessary in this case. We should not be mentioning birth location in the intro as that is irrelevant to why notable, just say "American actress" and change all the categories to match. American actress doesn't mean she is an American, just that that is where all her notable activities occurred. Need to explain all this on the talk page as it will likely be contentious if you do make the change. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:33, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

OK, will do – thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:38, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

I Am Frankie – J.D. Ballard (Mr. Kingston)

Starting with "I Am... Busting Out," he is being credited as Jim Ballard. What's the best way to handle this? As the article covers the entire series, it should not be changed just to the latter. And even if there were a season article, it would still be a problem since this isn't like Girl Meets World—If Girl Meets Word had season articles, Corey Fogelmanis would be listed last at the parent article, but before Danielle Fishel in the seasons two and three articles since they'd cover only those seasons, not the overall series.—because part of season two has J.D. Ballard while another part has Jim Ballard. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: I'd suggest "J.D. Ballard (also credited Jim Ballard) as Mr. Kingston, the head of EGG who seeks to reclaim Frankie to be used in WARPA's Project". We know it is the same person. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:46, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done. By the way, if you and MPFitz1968 are interested, IJBall has raised a valid statement at the discussion I started on the talk page yesterday—"Credits"—and more opinions never hurt anybody, right? Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:00, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Quick question: In tonight's episode, Will does not make a physical appearance, but his voice is heard calling Frankie. Does that count as an "appearance" or not? I know in the first episode of Lab Rats, Principal Perry was heard on the PA, but did not actually appear, and she was not credited with the guest stars there. So maybe the same logic here? Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:45, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: I'd say absent. Voice could be anyone who sounds similar to him. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:00, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Granted, it's from the wikia, but I think I very vaguely remember it. I can explain the confusion. Mr. Kington's actual name is Tom Reyes. Mr. Kingston is an alias. In the first season, his alias' first name is Gilford; in the second season, his alias' first name is Clarence. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:37, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: It is a plausible reason. Probably has many aliases. Maybe Tom Reyes is also false and his real name has not been disclosed and his family is also part of some cover. In the article, though, need to state just what is shown. He was credited and introduced as Mr. Kingston. Kingston's forename used changed. He is know as Tom Reyes to his children. No reason given in show but viewers are left to speculate and writers may be leaving a reason open for a future dramatic reveal. I think his real name is "Clarence Gilford Kingston" and he may use either. I think "Tom Reyes" is the alias. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:51, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

List of Welcome to the Wayne episodes

There is no reason that this shouldn't simply be merged back to Welcome to the Wayne, yes? There isn't nearly enough content to justify a separate article here, under the "single-season TV series shouldn't have standalone LoE articles" principle, for one. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:51, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: I agree. Should be merged back to main article for reasons you gave. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:12, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Should we add Cosby's inmate number?

Is the location of the prison Cosby is in and his inmate number relevant? 2605:6001:E7DD:AC00:D022:802D:5248:401B (talk) 02:38, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

No - trivia. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:41, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Somebody already added it to the article. It was also added to the sexual assault article. 2605:6001:E7DD:AC00:D022:802D:5248:401B (talk) 02:51, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Removed from the Cosby article and not in the Sexual assault article at all. --Ebyabe (talk) 03:01, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Serial commas in Australian English

You clearly have no idea of editing policies regarding different forms of English or the MOS on serial commas if you think you can just "add" a serial comma it because it's your preference after the article had been restored to the longstanding punctuation. You are being disruptive. Yahboo (talk) 14:27, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

@Yahboo: I don't generally care either way but I did do a search in the article for ", and" and found 38 usages and every place I checked used the serial comma correctly. Established style in the article is to use the serial comma. Consistency is required. The person who originally added it was correct per established style in the article. There was no justification for undoing that correction. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:33, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Moved to Talk:Nicole Kidman. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:40, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

I Am Frankie season finale

The promo for next week is saying "this season's final episodes." I don't know if that's enough for the episode count, but I wonder if it's sufficient for a season end date. Ping IJBall as well. PS: I hope you and IJBall have been keeping up, because bombs keep being dropped at the end of episodes. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:59, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

I'd think that would probably be enough for an end date, esp. if a later promo actually calls the last episode "the season finale". On my end, I'm a little behind on it (about 4 episodes). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:01, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: For the infobox stick with what has actually happened. For other locations in the article, referenced future info is OK. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:07, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

The Bureau of Magical Things

According to Nickelodeon ([1]), this is premiering on Nickelodeon on October 8. It's similar to Ride, where Nickelodeon acquired the rights. Doesn't look like there's that much content, so it'll be an easy cleanup project. Amaury (talk | contribs) 20:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

I'll try and convert the episodes table to proper formatting, when I have some time to kill... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:35, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Cleanup done. Apparently this series has been airing since July 8, but there wasn't anything I could find that confirmed that. There are also five episodes here with air dates of August 26, September 2, September 9, September 16, and September 23, which does at least confirm it's already airing in Australia. However, the problem is that there are no titles, so it's hard to tell which episode is which. I suppose we could match the episode summaries on the site with the COPYVIO summaries I removed, but that's probably WP:OR/WP:SYNTH as we don't know if whoever added the COPYVIO summaries even added them to the correct episodes. Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:46, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

I think if there's any way to add the Aussie air dates, even if they aren't explicitly sourced right now, we should do that... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:48, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done. Both The Futon Critic and Zap2it have updated. This will be just like Ride. Zap2it has the original country's premiere dates—in this case, Australia—while The Futon Critic has the U.S. premiere dates. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:29, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Quick followup to my rounding question

User talk:Geraldo Perez/Archive 15#How to deal with rounding fives?

Not getting back too much into this, but just a quick followup because I noticed something interesting.

Per my School of Rock example in that discussion, 1.025 rounds to 1.03, but Wikipedia's CALC function rounds that to 1.02—when it is the only number in the calculation—per the n5 explanation you gave: It appears the rounding functions in wikipedia round the exact .n5 down but .n5+(anything at all) gets rounded up so 1.4950 gets rounded to 1.49 and 1.4958 gets rounded to 1.50. The exact 5 is exactly half way between but anything even slightly above that 5 tilts the balance up. Wiki math is not rounding to even on the exact 5, it is rounding to zero on the exact 5. In the School of Rock example you gave 1.025 rounds to 1.02 but substituting 1.015 rounds to 1.01 not 1.02 which would happen if wiki followed the round to even practice. Here is where it gets interesting, though. Look at my Ratings section here: User:Amaury/sandbox/God Friended Me#Ratings. The raw data is 10.135, yet the CALC function is rounding it to 10.14, as we would, instead of 10.13. Huh. Interesting. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:38, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: That is weird. Wonder if they changed the way wiki math does this and are now rounding exact half up? Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:55, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Don't think so, because 1.025 still results in 1.02 instead of 1.03. Wonder if it depends on the number... By playing around below, I can see that 1.005–1.035 stays the same, but anything from 1.045 and up will round up (1.05).

Viewership and ratings per season of Geraldo Perez/Archive 17

Season	Episodes	First aired		Last aired		Avg. viewers (millions)	18–49 rank
		Date	Viewers (millions)	Date	Viewers (millions)
1	1	January 1, 2018 (2018-01-01)	TBD	TBA	TBD	1.02	TBD

Viewership and ratings per season of Geraldo Perez/Archive 17

Season	Episodes	First aired		Last aired		Avg. viewers (millions)	18–49 rank
		Date	Viewers (millions)	Date	Viewers (millions)
1	1	January 1, 2018 (2018-01-01)	TBD	TBA	TBD	10.14	TBD

Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:41, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: There is no rounding rule I am familiar with that would correctly give those results. Looks like wiki math has a software bug. Should be reported but I am not familiar with how to do that. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:10, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Lauren Lee Smith

Geraldo, I have an edit warring editor, who has clearly edited as both an named account and as an IP, at Lauren Lee Smith. I'm probably at my limit in terms of what I can do on my end (without getting into "trouble" myself), I suspect. Editing as the IP got the article semi-protected (not by my request). Editor is now back as the named account. I've warned the editor at their Talk page(s, both of them), and opened up a topic at the article Talk page on this. Any thoughts?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:56, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Discussion has started, see how it plays out. It would reflect well on the editor to respond on the talk page and start communicating. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:31, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

And if the other editor ignores the discussion, and keeps changing to a non-WP:ACCESS-compliant version (which seems likely)?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:33, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Then we would have an issue with a disruptive edit warring editor who is using sock accounts and can be treated as such. It depends on how he responds to this. Discussion would be best result. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:39, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

List of I Am Frankie episodes

Please keep a little closer eye on it. Thanks. Both The Futon Critic and Zap2it show no changes to the schedule and show October 5 for I Am Frankie and October 7 for Double Dare. If there's been a last-minute scheduling change, we will find out tomorrow. Until then... Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:36, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

It is already confirmed. There has been a schedule changed, as confirmed by multiple sources. Double Dare is Fridays at 8pm now, the I Am Frankie season finale is tomorrow night (10/4). Schedules on Zap2it and Futon should be updated tomorrow. Source 1, Source 2, Source 3, Source 4, Source 5 Magitroopa (talk) 00:40, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

That is not a valid rationale for changing or removing dates. If dates are listed, they stay there until changed by the scheduling guides or the dates pass and what was planned doesn't happen. Add: Regardless, you need to start a discussion on the talk page, per WP:BRD, not just mindlessly insist that you're right. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:53, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

References in the article about the series I Am Frankie still show the date and that is what we should go by. Other references about shows that are not I Am Frankie say nothing about how I Am Frankie will be handled on that date. Some references stated such as Nick and More are not reliable sources. If the date is contentious because of conflicting sources it would be appropriate to still list the date but add a footnote giving details about the issue. Will be moot in a day or so anyway. If we do get a reliable source that authoritatively overrides the column reference it needs to be in the table entry. None of the references stated do that as of now. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:45, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

My DVR updated overnight – looks like they are double-running the last two episode of season #2 of I Am Frankie tonight. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:35, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Yes, Zap2it updated last night. Why they couldn't wait until one or both of the scheduling guides updated is beyond me. I imagine they were constantly refreshing, too, since they were pretty on top of it when they updated the article. People are always in such as a rush to update everything. lol Amaury (talk | contribs) 12:42, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Quack Pack

I managed to revert myself on the other pages as well ([2] [3] [4] [5]). I must admit I'm no expert on MOS guidelines, but after taking another look at the one you linked me to, I think what I did was perfectly in line with the "first occurrence of a term". I've seen this formatting being used for other pages like List of Pokemon characters and List of Hey Arnold! characters and the lack of formatting makes character lists that are accompanied by a plot summary hard to read. Maybe I'm missing something, but I do want to discuss this.—Mythdon (talk • contribs) 00:00, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

@Mythdon: My understanding of MOS:BOLD. The first occurrence of a term applies to redirects so that a reader following a redirect knows they are at the correct place and are not surprised why they are at this article when they typed something else. This applies mostly to the lead for synonyms of the article title. Some articles, as you illustrate, are going against the MOS and should be fixed to conform. It is common for editors to bold stuff that shouldn't be bolded and a lot of times it isn't caught and fixed. Italics are generally OK for emphasis if you want to make something stand out a bit, bold should be rarely used. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:07, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

I just want these entries to be legible such that it's easy to differentiate between the names/titles and the plot summary and I was mainly going by what I seen on most other articles. But since MOS:ITALIC mainly applies to titles of works, It's probably going to be hard to achieve without violating the MOS, other than just keeping your edit intact.—Mythdon (talk • contribs) 01:29, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

@Mythdon: MOS:EMPHASIS supports using italics . Italics are specifically required in some places but general emphasis is OK as long as not overused. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:35, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

I saw that, but wasn't sure if that applied to character lists, but I suppose I'll give it a try on Quack Pack and the other pages I reverted myself on.—Mythdon (talk • contribs) 01:40, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Just checking

Hello GP. When I remove a protection template that expired a few days ago I usually check the edit history for any funny business so I apologize for missing the date change at the The ZhuZhus (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) article. My questions are 1) Does it get a lot of vandalism? 2) If so should a new protection be requested? Thanks for your time. MarnetteD|Talk 05:49, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: It was pretty consistent up to the last protect and resumed immediately after that protect expired. Likely same person using various IPs and noted they could edit article again. My plan was to see if it got bad again then ask for a protect if it did. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:57, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good. Thanks for filling me in. MarnetteD|Talk 05:58, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

List of Disney XD channels in Europe

Geraldo, what are your thoughts on this article?... It's {{Notability}} tagged, so I'm wondering if it should just go. Honestly, I've never seen another article like this, certainly not one that's a "list" article... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:55, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: WP:LISTN seems a lot more tolerant than most notability guidelines for articles. Main criteria listed is One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources. Looking through the references, looks lacking by that test. Maybe merging or redirecting to List of Disney XD TV channels. The programming details appear beyond the scope of this list. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:15, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

 Done – redirected as per this edit. As I say in the edit summary, content there was either redundant, or should reside at new standalone articles on each of those channels currently without their own article. But in the version this one was in, it was a Frankenstein's monster, with all of the programming lists being out of WP:SCOPE for the titled topic of the article, and there not being enough worthwhile content to keep once all of that was removed. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:45, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

I Am Frankie season 3

IMPORTANT NOTE: If you're behind on season two, don't watch the following video until you're all caught up!

This video from the official Nickelodeon YouTube appears to confirm that season three is a go, though we should probably hold off for now on adding anything. Pinging IJBall as well. Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:33, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Still have to get through the final two episodes of season #2 from Thursday night – will get to those in the next 24 hours. Then I'll take a look at the video... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:06, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Descendants (franchise)

Geraldo, could you please keep an extra eye on this article? – We have an IP hopping editor who keeps adding Whoopi Goldberg to the cast table despite her role being uncredited and incredibly minor. Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:53, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

IP is still at it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:11, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Marsupilami (1993 TV series)

Geraldo, several issues to unpack here. The first is that I have no idea how the current episode numbering scheme was derived at the article, and the episodes are not currently listed in airing order – any thoughts on how to handle this?... Second, I think this article title is unnecessarily disambiguated currently – unless I'm missing something, this should just be at Marsupilami (TV series). Third, I count three different articles (at least), at this title, so is it time to create a Marsupilami (disambiguation) page?... Thanks in advance. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:38, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: The episodes look to be ordered in production order but the episode numbers don't look like production codes so we don't even know if production order is correct. If reordered by airing date we would lose creation order. It looks like the primary way people know this series now is via video releases. I think keeping it in the current order for an old series like this is more useful to readers even if it does go against how we normally do things. Just my opinion for this case.

As for naming, the 1993 in the name looks unnecessary but there is a 2000 French TV series with no article that is covered in the primary topic. There should be a redirect with possibilities at Marsupilami (2000 TV series) pointing to that section which would make the 1993 in the current article necessary. Marsupilami, the primary for this topic points to the other two disambiguated articles. However a cursory search for Marsupilami turns up more possibilities for links and with more than 2 other than the primary I think it reasonable to have a (disambiguation) page for the topic. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:10, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

U.S. Copyright Office appears to list prod. codes "no. 6401" to "no. 6413", which presumably are for this series, but no titles (or even directors) are listed so that's no help. At the least, we need some kind of explanation in that section as to why the episodes are listed in the order they are, if they're not going to be listed in airing order... I don't believe in "preemptive disambiguation", so I'm inclined to move this one to Marsupilami (TV series) for now (it can always be moved back should an article for the 2000 version ever be created...). However, if a WP:DABPAGE is created, of course the 2000 version should be included there. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:16, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: I generally consider a redirect with possibilities the same as an article for disambiguation purposes. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:21, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Is this a reliable source for a lawsuit?

Diff. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:30, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: Yes, major Canadian newspaper. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:34, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

sorry.

Sorry ....Me and my friends were just fucking around. Sorry. Dansmith100 (talk) 01:01, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Kosher?...

Geraldo, an editor is making a series of edits like this – is this kosher? --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:05, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

No. The networks themselves are the distributor and do not need to be listed, per what Geraldo has said in the past about this. The parameter is more for DVD releases. Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:15, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Disney–ABC Home Entertainment and Television Distribution is the current name and they are basically responsible for syndication, home video and streaming sales but it does not appear, in Disney's case, the first run broadcast which is the networks who seem to get stuff independently from the production companies. It is a bit iffy if they count as an original distributor for current first-run stuff that gets to Netflix and iTunes the next day likely from them. This appears to be original research when people add it and it is generally added without anything in the article for support or any justification given. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:35, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Yet another pilot order from Disney Channel: The A Girl

User:Amaury/sandbox/The A Girl – Nickelodeon needs to start following their lead. All they have that is upcoming is Cousins for Life. Also, no idea why my reference isn't showing up and the page formatting is messed up. IJBall, MPFitz1968 Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:37, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Brenda Hampton is a hard NO from me – you couldn't pay me to watch another one of her shows! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:19, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Did I miss something? Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:52, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Hampton's shows are horrible!: 7th Heaven was awful, and Secret Life... was even worse – that or The Fosters is my personal vote for the "worst" show of the past decade. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:31, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

"Disney Asia"/"Disney Southeast Asia" vandal

Geraldo, formally writing this up here so there's a record somewhere, as this doesn't seem to be going away... Asking MPFitz1968 and Amaury – have we seen this vandal use any other IP range outside of 180.191.(114?).*?... If not, it may be time to start hitting WP:AIV and requesting a rangeblock for this. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:30, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Range has not changed ever since it started its vandalism in February. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:38, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Well, that's 180.190.*.*, so that was a little different... Is it possible the rangeblock this? Or is it too much?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:40, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Andi Mack history. Ctrl + F "180.191.114." I seem to recall Geraldo saying the range was too wide, but I don't remember. Will ping BU Rob13 as well as Ad Orientem, who was nice enough to semi-protect Andi Mack for a year a while ago, and see what they think about how to deal with this IP range. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:49, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Looks like a lot of valid edits looking at special:contributions/180.191.0.0/16 so a range block that large looks unlikely as too much collateral damage. Unless a smaller range can be identified that only gets this one person, I doubt that a range block this large will be done. special:contributions/180.191.114.0/23 looks a bit better but still see a significant amount of good edits. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:57, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

So we're going to be forced to play "whack-a-mole" with this?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:17, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Blocks on individual IPs will likely be ineffective as appears dynamic. Ranges used have lots of good edits. Best is protects on articles he targets and be aware of general issues with that range on this type of article. I can't think of much else that could be done other than a large range block and accept the collateral damage. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:23, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall and Amaury: I went and studied the IP addresses recently of those in 180.191.* which have been presenting the most trouble in the Disney-related articles, and the third part of the address I have noticed most has the numbers 111, 114, 115, 118 or 119. All five of those numbers have shown up in the last 500 edits at Andi Mack and have been active over the last couple of months at pages like Bug Juice: My Adventures at Camp, Bizaardvark and Template: Disney Channel Original Series, to name a few, plus they've also been editing at Mitsubishi Motors and falsely linking that with Disney Channel or Disney in some way. 114 has certainly been the most active in recent days, and we should focus on that one, but those other four should still be watched, and if necessary we can ask for a range block on 180.191.x.0/24 at any time, where x is one of those numbers I mentioned above. Any time I see a 180.191.* edit in my watchlist immediately draws suspicion, and I'm ready to revert their edit on the spot. MPFitz1968 (talk) 05:39, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Template:Nickelodeon original series and Nicktoons

Got a disruptive IP here – I've asked for discussion, and instead they're just reverting away. Would appreciate some backup here. Pinging Amaury as well. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:33, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Noted. Template has already been on my watchlist. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:03, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: I think sufficient discussion has happened to support removing {{small}} from the template; if you were to agree it would create consensus. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:55, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

No objection to that, really, but it's going to have to be "fixed" at multiple templates, not just this one, so pinging Amaury here. Also, none of that deals with Gonnym's point that the template actually badly needs to be split (a point I agree with) – so what to do about that?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:05, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Need closure on this one issue about {{small}} on this particular template first. There is near consensus to remove it. If you agree on the talk page and make the change that closes the issue. Per the admin comments there looks to be a strong argument for removing it from all navboxes. I personally don't like font size fiddling anywhere mainly because my eyesight is somewhat lacking and I find larger fonts easier to read. I set the default size on my browser to balance size vs. amount of content and smaller than normal fonts are harder to read for me. The other issue of splitting the template is a separate discussion. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:16, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

 Done. But the "splitting" discussion needs to be followed up on – in its current form, this navbox is beyond unwieldy, and Gonnym is right that it needs to be split. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:21, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

OK, so here are some other templates with this WP:FONTSIZE issue: Template:YTV original series, Template:Disney Channel Original Series, and Template:Disney XD Original Series. I'm sure there are others... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:16, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Template:The Lying Game

Would you advise taking this to WP:TfD – yes or no? It's probably borderline "under the rules", but I really don't see the point at all... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:06, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: I'd say take it to Tfd. I don't see the point of this navbox. There are basically two loosely related items the book series and the TV series. The episode list is just an extension of the TV series article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:09, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Zap2it

I wonder if they're no longer getting early info for Disney Channel. September schedules weren't out around August 10, October schedules weren't out around September 10, and now November schedules should have been out on Zap2it on Thursday the 11th, looking at schedule releases earlier this year. In fact, for September and October, The Futon Critic had Disney Channel schedules out before Zap2it, and you literally never saw that before. Maybe it's technical problems? I dunno. Weird. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:33, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Add: Even weirder is that the old Zap2it affiliate archive seems to have November schedules, but not actual site. For example, Raven's Home: Zap2it, Zap2it Affiliate. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:37, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

The only reason I hesitate on using the affiliate Zap2it, which uses the old layout before the site updated, as a reference is because I have no idea if it's actually connected to Zap2it or not. A definition of affiliate: a person or organization officially attached to a larger body. That I think means that Zap2it Affiliate is indeed attached to Zap2it, but I don't know if it's run by the same people; therefore, I don't know if it's still considered reliable. Could it be used? Pinging IJBall to this as well. Interestingly enough, as I mentioned above, the affiliate has Disney Channel November premieres out now, which is right, as around the tenth of each month is when we see Disney Channel's schedules for the next month, but for some reason, the Zap2it (non-affiliate) website hasn't been updating, as mentioned, with next month's schedules for Disney Channel at the proper time for a while now. The last time it updated correctly was when Disney Channel August schedules were up on Zap2it on July 11. Amaury (talk | contribs) 04:26, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: I consider the affiliate outlets reliable. It looks like Zap2it has different feeds for different purposes. Possibly the affiliate feed gets more advanced info maybe because they pay for that and Zap2it is restricting the main feed now for that reason. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:53, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't like using the "affiliate" one, and consider it less than valid, because not everyone can "see" the info (e.g. I cannot), and I dislike "sources" that not everyone has access to. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:22, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: I understand the frustration of not being able verify sources for those of us who regularly verify them. Particularly in articles with significant amounts of dubious future info added such as episode lists. The problem is that the source is reliable in as much as any other Zap2it feed is ever reliable for reporting future episode info. WP:SOURCEACCESS prevents us from rejecting sources just because they are hard to get to and says ask others for help verifying. Basically I read this to mean if I can't get to a source but some editor who I trust can and does verify then we should accept it. The other problem is that multiple good-faith editors are following the WP:V and using those sources that are, as far as they know, acceptable. This is a temporary problem as eventually other program guides pick up the info and the most forward reporting either get confirmed or overridden with new info. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:09, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, so what I'm basically saying is as soon as those other sources provide the same info, we should immediately switch away from using the "affiliate" one, for the problems with it I've outlined. IOW, if both are available, then regular Zap2It and/or Futon >> the "affiliate" Zap2It... Using this one is akin to using a "subscription" web-based source: if it's all you've got, you use it, but if you can get a "non-subscription" source, use that one preferentially... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:13, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: That is my plan. As for Zap2it, I'm thinking that's one of the reasons the regular site updated, because people were having problems consistently seeing content. As mentioned, the problem now is that the regular Zap2it, at least for now, is no longer getting early info for Disney Channel like it used to. Also as mentioned, the last time it did was when August schedules were released on July 11. Rather than continue to deal with IPs adding it, I figured we'd better just use it temporarily until The Futon Critic and regular Zap2it update. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:19, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Henry Danger

I suspect once Zap2it updates with the full October Nickelodeon schedule, we'll have a better idea since they divide into seasons, but for now, it seems impossible to tell where season five will actually be starting since there's a mix of S4 and S5, going back and forth a bit. Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:18, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Zap2it has updated with full Nickelodeon October schedules, but is currently not of help as the October Henry Danger episodes are listed under S4: Henry Danger Zap2it. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:09, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

With tonight's Halloween special being the first season five produced episode, one of the changes includes Michael D. Cohen being main cast now, as we knew from the announcement. Normally, we would have something like what we have at The Thundermans et al.: "Maya Le Clark as Chloe Thunderman (recurring, season 3; main, season 4)" However, the problem here is that it's still not clear what the first episode of season five is, and Zap2it is currently no help, as mentioned above. And as we know, production codes mean diddly squat. As such, we cannot currently say "Michael D. Cohen as Schwoz (recurring, seasons 1–4; main, season 5)" as there is no "season five." For now, I'm just leaving it without the parenthetical note. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:37, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: Looks reasonable. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:47, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

I noticed here that an archive of Zap2it is listing season 4 episodes as season 5, and http://affiliate.zap2it.com/tv/henry-danger/episode-guide/EP01953422 TVguide.com on the other hand is putting all the season 5 episodes with season 5 and season 4 with season 4. https://www.tvguide.com/tvshows/henry-danger/episodes/677634/ --2605:6000:A507:A300:607E:CFC5:8E00:2E77 (talk) 17:03, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Austin & Ally

Agree or disagree with the latest series of edits? Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:44, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: I have no opinion on whether or not the edits are valid as I have no idea what the editor was trying to accomplish and what his reasons were. Based on any lack of justification for strange edits it is best to go back to a previous stable version. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:50, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Hotel Transylvania: The Series

Need some eyes at this article; IPs are changing the "Season 1" heading in Episodes to read "Season 1 (2017–present)", instead of "Season 1 (2017–18)". There is a hidden note saying not to use "present", and while it may sound OK to someone reading the article, I don't recall MOS:TV using that word in those kind of section headings. I recall this being one of the disruptions at the article with IPs persistently changing that heading over the last several months. MPFitz1968 (talk) 05:40, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

The Bureau of Magical Things

If you skip to 22:58–22:59 here, where it says "No animals were harmed..." there's a number at the bottom, starting with ISAN. Is that a production code number, similar to the T40 or whatever that we see on some broadcast series? Like Splitting Up Together. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:46, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: http://www.isan.org says it is a universal identifier for any video content like ISBN is for books. It is likely assigned in production sequence so could be used to show that. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:08, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Geraldo, I require assistance on the article. Thanks in advance Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:42, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Probably best to leave this for now – let's wait to see how it airs over the next few days. (I notice it isn't on TeenNick tonight...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:56, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Except that their using of the Zap2it source for the US column virtually makes that entire column unsourced as Zap2it has the AU air dates–for example, July 8 vs. October 8 for the premiere. Although I see you got that while I was writing this. Also, they're lying. The Futon Critic *has* updated and now has Monday–Thursday premieres for this week and the next three weeks: The Futon Critic. On another note: or better yet google search my user name so you can know how credible I am. I'll trust scheduling guides over some random person any day. Add: Also, there is virtually nothing that makes TeenNick's scheduling any more correct than other guides. Since we use The Futon Critic and Zap2it for our title and air date sourcing, that's what we go by. And just like any other time, if something listed doesn't happen when it's supposed to happen, then we remove it after the fact, not go by some arbitrary person who claims it's wrong before the scheduled date passes. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:03, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yeah, luckily Futon updated here, which solved the issue. But while Zap2It can't be used directly there, the cable scheduling guide did indeed show no episode tonight, so I think that would have been good enough to remove today's date from the table. (It just would have meant removing all the other dates after last night as well...) Also, I disagree that we can't use the schedules published directly on the network websites – if those are reasonably updated, they should be usable. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:08, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't necessarily disagree with using other guides outside of those two, either, but I'm not going to take the word of a user who says to look at their blog and refuses to at least provide a courtesy link to an official scheduling guide on a network's on website. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury and IJBall: It looks like this is resolved for now? Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:32, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, mostly(?) – it looks like Futon updated to match the changes that the other editors were making to the U.S. schedule at the article. However, I think there's still an issue with the upcoming UK air dates – I didn't pay attention to that part of the conflict. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:36, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Mostly being the keyword. This edit right here is total WP:OR. We can assume, but can't prove that for Zap2it. As such, we list those air dates. If those dates pass in Australia and the episodes don't air, then Australia watchers can confirm it and remove the air dates. Until then, if they're listed, the dates stay. That's how it's always worked, and the sooner stubborn editors like this—who's likely a sockpuppet of the IP and perhaps previous IPs/users—understand this, the better. I, however, am sadly out of reverts. We can't just exclude information because we "think" it's wrong. It's just like when WP Editor 2012 kept wanting to remove air dates for Henry Danger and Game Shakers episodes because he thought they were wrong, either because they were on an unusual day or they were too far out. Amaury (talk | contribs) 23:51, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Okay so now I'm a really stubborn "sock puppet", do we really have to result to name calling here? It was a minor thing that could be proved with a google search for any major TV listings website like Zap2it, TVGuide.com or TitanTV or pressing the guide button on your set top box and seeing first hand on TeenNick's schedule so I didn't bother logging in. I have been helping provide schedules and highlights for Nick and Disney fandoms for over a decade at this point, I used to work for AnimationInsider, I run The Cable Forum (formerlly CableTVTalk) and my name is pretty well known with several major Nick sites like NickAndMore, sites that cover fandom related things like DenOfGeek and numerous Degrassi and Power Rangers sites who have used my information as a source for airdates and episode titles and descriptions. Sadly kids TV doesn't get reliable coverage like network primetime TV does so it's hard to get any concrete info besides niche sources that many times are fan run, and other sites you do accept as a source like The Futon Critic mostly focuses on major network TV, so it took them all week before they finally updated their air dates. It also doesn't help that for some dumb reason Nick refuses to post any schedules besides for today and tommorow on their website so we can't even use them as a reliable source for upcoming airdates. I get listings directly from the networks via the same mailing lists they send to the listings providers, and I also am familiar with the raw TMS/Gracenote data that powers Zap2it's listings, their "original air dates" are based on who airs a show first worldwide. It wasn't a coincidence that suddenly the airdates lined up with what would have been Nickelodeon's airing schedule after they caught up with Australia. Look at Zap2it's episode guides for some recent seasons of Power Rangers like Dino Charge where Nick only airs a few episodes then it goes on hiatus until August, but in the interim other countries like France and UK air the rest of the season before the USA, so Zap2it's airdates have the first few Nick airdates and then the international airdates. You also won't need to be in Australia to prove Zap2it's "original air dates" wrong, in a week or two Eleven's schedule for these days will be listed on the "TV Guide" section of TenPlay.com.au, and after the fact it will be on their show page where they list the air dates for the last few episodes available to watch on their player. However, since those pages are highly dynamic, I don't think they can be linked to directly as a source. Kyl416 (talk) 04:38, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

@Kyl416: Using multiple accounts to edit contentious issues is not advised as it looks like multiple editors support a position when it is a single person. Editing both logged out and logged in is thus not advised and editors may consider it a form of WP:Sock puppetry even if inadvertent. As for sourcing we need it so people can independently verify information. We have a reference for that column in the article, it is considered reliable and meets our reliable source standards, and it is easy to check. You are basically disputing that source as a reliable source for a subset of the information provided in it basically by saying you have inside expert knowledge not available to the rest of us and for us to trust that you, a basically anonymous wikipedia editor, are a reliable source. I personally have no reason to doubt you and the information you provide but you still don't meet the requirements of WP:IRS as a source of information we can used as a reference. Also it is no real problem for the information to be temporarily in flux as future airing dates are always plans, not commitments and the data will be corrected when we have historical data to use. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:52, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

List of Gadget & the Gadgetinis episodes

Geraldo, any idea what's going on here? I'm guessing it was two seasons of 26 episodes each, and the LoE article just hasn't split that into two separate sections with tables?...

Also, any strong objection to merging the LoE content back to Gadget & the Gadgetinis? – That really doesn't look robust enough to justify a separate LoE article IMO. --IJBall (contribs • talk)

@IJBall: Might have been 2 seasons or two production runs with no season break. No idea which. I have no problem with undoing the split and merging the ep list back. Little content in the summaries so table is fairly short for the number of episodes. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:11, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm also likely to remove the prod. codes, as unsourced – I checked U.S.C.O., and this series is not listed in the database, so I've got to think those prod. codes are made up. They are certainly unverifiable... Anyway, I'll try to get to cleaning this up before the weekend's up – if not, it may be next week some time... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:13, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @IJBall: I think you're wise to delete them. A lot of people confuse internal production codes with episode codes, and all they tend to do in the context of an episode list, is assert that the numbering we have is exactly equal to the way the series was produced or exactly equal to the way the studio intended the episodes to be released, neither of which is likely to be proven in most cases, especially in children's animation. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

And, in fact, in those cases when the prod. codes exactly match the episode airing order, I usually advocate leaving them out of the episode tables, as in these cases, the prod. codes are fully redundant... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:57, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Splitting Up Together

May need some more eyes there. Got an editor making WP:OSE arguments. Thanks in advance. Add: Plus, the average they were including wasn't incorrect, but was inconsistent with the data. They were including the overall average, when the average should be the Live+SD average to be consistent with the ratings reported, as is the case in the current STATUSQUO version. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:47, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Unrelated followup

Geraldo, IJBall, do either want to take a look at and evaluate this misunderstanding of the WP:TVCAST guideline? I was going to, but decided to come here first. Since there are only first names, WP:COMMONNAME applies, and it's even mentioned in the edit. When there are only first names, we only source them until a series premieres, as after that, the series becomes a WP:PRIMARY source. We only keep sources if there are last names included, which isn't the case here. Next, since it's also names per credits, also mentioned in the edit, guest star names do not need to be sourced since the credits are the WP:PRIMARY source for that, and why only Henry was chosen is beyond me. And in Splitting Up Together's case, it shows both actor and character names in the end credits for guest stars. (The only exception would be something like Andi Mack, where it's just Ham in the credits, but we have the press bios that support Henry "Ham" Mack.) Lastly, this should only be a "Cast" section right now. My conclusion is that, again, the WP:TVCAST guideline is being misunderstood or is being followed too aggressively, as is unfortunately often the case with guidelines. I was going to take action, but I'm coming here first this time. I was guilty of this myself when a few years ago I would aggressively follow WP:OVERLINKING, as IJBall and Nyu know. But I learned how guidelines work. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:47, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

I've fixed the 'Cast' issue. Aside from that, I don't see anything wrong with sourcing the cast list (though I'd argue those sources should primarily reside in a 'Casting' section, not in the 'Cast' section itself...) – some may view that as redundant, but I prefer more sourcing to less sourcing. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:53, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: I can work on rewriting the Production section from scratch and sourcing everything there. For now, at the very least, though, I don't think Henry should be sourced since the end credits are WP:PRIMARY. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:11, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

I'd leave it – it's better with the source than without. Frankly, that source actually verifies the "recurring" status, so it's not even remotely WP:OR-y in the section with the reference included. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:13, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

I'll accept that, but only because it's you. 😉 I'm still going to stick with "another one of those editors following guidelines too aggressively," though. Aren't you contradicting yourself, though? We had a source that supported Frankie's last name of Gaines, but you removed the last name, with preferring the credits over the source, which is of course fine, though I later removed the source to accommodate that since it was no longer needed, and you didn't question me about it. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:36, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall and Amaury: I don't watch the series so don't know what is in credits. If actor-character names are in credits, sourcing to some other source, particularly a non-official source, is unnecessarily redundant. If the credits don't have the info, then they need to be sourced, official sources preferred. The guideline says one or the other but sourced common name should only be required if there is no credited names. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:39, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

For guest stars on this series, both actor and character names are shown in the end credits. Main cast's character names are not shown, though. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:48, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Breadwinners (TV series)#The co-producer is not the producer

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Breadwinners (TV series)#The co-producer is not the producer. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:39, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Speaking of producers, is there a difference between "producer" and "produced by" or are they just different labels to mean the same thing? Most of the time, both are used in TV series. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:56, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: Producer is a job title and produced by is a job description generally held by the producer so looks to be the same role. Basically the person in charge of production who runs the production department. My objection is for other members of the production department who work for the producer being listed as the producer in the infobox. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:04, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Agree with co- being unnecessary to list. Amaury (talk | contribs) 20:06, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: Actually thinking on it some more, sometimes senior writers and key actors of long-running shows end up with a producer title as a courtesy. The "produced by" person is the actual person running the production of the show. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:12, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Freaky Friday (2018 film)#Amaury's BRD request

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Freaky Friday (2018 film)#Amaury's BRD request. MPFitz1968 also invited. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:32, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

A Simple Favor reverting back.

Please do not threaten to block me. I was giving a good reason. I am keeping the as of. Besides, I was using box office mojo which has correct information. If it says it grossed the amount on a certain day, it should say as of that day. The access date shall be on the day it got received on box office mojo. Evan Opedal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evope (talk • contribs) 21:42, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

@Evope: I replied on your talk page. Best to keep conversations in context. I am watching for replies on your page and can be alerted if pinged with the "re" or "ping" templates. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:46, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Dot.

This is another problematic one – I have no idea what order the episodes are listed in here! There are no prod. codes listed, but the episodes aren't listed in order of either the Canadian or the U.S. airdates. (Note: That I have added Zap2It as a source, so hopefully that cuts down on data vandalism...) But, I have no idea what's going on here... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:47, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: I touched the article fixing vandalism and haven't looked too seriously at it other than that. Some of the dates are sourced. It is a Canadian show so airing order should be based on that and it looks like Zap2it is matching that. May be best for now to leave it be. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:38, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

But that's what I'm saying – the episode order does not match the Canadian airing order (e.g. look at episode "#4", etc.). It needs to at least match the Canadian airing order... This isn't a high priority for me, but this needs to be fixed at some point... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:44, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: It should be ordered to match the Canadian dates. No reason to be out of airing order date. My concern is getting those dates right before doing the reordering. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:49, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

On that, I checked the Zap2It dates when I added it as a source, and they do seem to match all of the Canadian airdates. So, now that that is sourced, I think we can take it to the bank, and reorder the episodes based on the listed Canadian airdates... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:51, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: I agree. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:13, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Why are Showbuzz Daily and TV by the Numbers disagreeing with each other?

This is interesting. For example, FBI:

• Showbuzz Daily Archived 2018-12-15 at the Wayback Machine: 9.173 million (L+SD), which would be 9.17 million
• TV by the Numbers Live+7 Report for October 8–14 Archived 2019-04-02 at the Wayback Machine: 9.178 million (L+SD), which would be 9.18 million

What's even weirder is that in the regular report when October 9 finals Archived 2018-10-11 at the Wayback Machine were released on October 10, TV by the Numbers does correctly show 9.17 million (9.173 -> 9.17), as they round total viewers on the individual finals, but when they make the Live+3 and Live+7 reports, they show the raw numbers for total viewers. 9.173 is correct, so I don't know why it's doing that. And with everything. The Live+SDs mentioned in the Live+7 reports never match with the Live+SDs shown when a day's finals are released. Not sure about Live+3 reports. 9.173 is correct, and it's what I'm leaning on as, again, 9.173 -> 9.17, so I don't know what's going on with the Live+7 reports. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:22, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

@Aumaury: I can only guess that they are getting data either from different places or different times or someone at one of the sites made a mistake. 9.173 looks reasonable to choose. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:27, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, not a big deal, as I don't do DVR ratings on Nickelodeon and Disney Channel series. Although ratings all come from Nielsen and do not change and are fixed numbers for each day, so when they are accessed does not really matter, as far as I know. A TV day is 6:00 AM–6:00 AM, and the Live+SD ratings we see are the live viewing, of course, plus DVR viewings up to 3:00 AM the next day. And I think a mistake is also out of the question since Showbuzz Daily and TV by the Number's Live+7 reports are always disagreeing with each other, as is obvious by taking a look at some of the other ratings on Showbuzz Daily (and TV by the Numbers) there and then comparing them to TV by the Numbers' Live+7 article for that week. Again, not a huge deal, really, since the only articles that I watch that have DVR ratings are Alex, Inc and Splitting Up Together, but it's still rather weird. lol Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:42, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks on The Haunted Hathaways

I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for fixing my edit on The Haunted Hathaways. I had intended to go back further in the history to a known good version but seem to have hit the wrong button.

Thanks for catching my error and cleaning up the vandalism.

--KNHaw ^(talk) 20:42, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

@KNHaw: That editor was using two accounts and it is easy to miss. It has happened to me a lot so I try to watch for that. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:16, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Cousins for Life

MPFitz1968, IJBall, Nyuszika7H

Just a heads up that this series will be premiering soon and now meets WP:TVSHOW as it has a date. However, IJBall, I will need your magic at User:Amaury/sandbox/Cousins for Life as I can't overwrite the redirect you created. Amaury (talk | contribs) 23:44, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I can't overwrite that redirect either, and this is super-annoying as it has a trivial revision history, and should be overwriteable. This must have something to do with trying to move from Userspace to overwrite a redirect in Mainspace. (I wonder if the same thing would happen with a move from Draftspace?...) This seems to me to be a technical deficiency with the WP:Page mover right – I should be able to easily overwrite redirects like this in situations like this with this user right... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:50, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

 Done. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:55, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Is this new? I've always done it that way and considered it no different than linking names in both the infobox and once in each body section. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:27, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Basically, it's pointless to link to a section in the same article from the infobox (esp. for "small" articles). I've noticed that Geraldo has a tendency to remove those, and I've come to agree with him about it... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:40, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: When you say small articles, do you mean one season series, either currently one season or one-season wonders? Or is it pointless at articles like LSBS as well. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:53, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall and Amaury: Template instructions for that attribute say "If a Wikipedia "List of" article exists for the show's episodes, put its name here." I take that to mean link only if a separate article exists and if a list of episodes article does not exist do not put anything in that attribute. Also the table of contents is right next to the infobox and the Episodes is one of the content items so it is somewhat unnecessary to duplicate the TOC entry. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:12, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Gotcha. So regardless of the number of seasons, if it's only a parent article that contains everything, #Episodes does not go in the list_episodes parameter unless there is a separate list of episodes article, in which case it would be List of X episodes. And for the one-season wonders like Lab Rats: Elite Force, the parameter can be removed entirely. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:23, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: Yes. May get pushback so I like to leave a hidden note summarizing the infobox instructions. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:32, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Again, to me, it depends on how "long" the article is – if it's a super-long article with the 'Episodes' section several "screenlengths" down, then I could see using it with a section link. But for the kinds of articles that the Nick and Disney shows get, it's not necessary, as the 'Episodes' section will be right there because the articles are so short in length... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:38, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) All  Done (contribs). Whew! Lot a work I've been doing lately. (Courtesy ping IJBall.) Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:41, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Readers expect to find sections using the TOC so putting the same entry in the infobox is redundant. The TOC is right after the lead in most articles. If the info is in some other article it makes more sense to link it in the infobox. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:54, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Itsrik1

We may need to keep an eye on this one. While they're autoconfirmed, it's a barely-used account, and they just created two non-notable WP:BLPs, and an inappropriate "season" article, all of which I've converted to redirects. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:34, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Butterbean's Café

Geraldo, what's your opinion on this? The episode table at the article does some "2a"/"2b" "splitting" of the episodes. But when you look at The Futon Listing for this one, the first 8 episodes have single prod. codes, not "#101A"/"#101B"-type listings... Based on that, I think those episodes that don't have "#101A"/"#101B" prod. codes should be recombined into a single (row) entry in the episodes table... Thoughts? --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:40, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Futon gives the #codes an A or B if the segments are on different days and merges the segments in one entry with no A or B is they are on the same day. So far the segments for an episode look to be adjacent in date sequence if they fall on different dates so merging all the segments into one entry with HR breaks for title, date if different, and #code when appropriate would work. I think we should either split all segments into separate entries as is done now, or combine them. I don't really like the idea of combining some and splitting others, unless there was no segmentation as shown in the first ep. I guess my preference would be to combine all the segments into single episode entries with appropriate HR breaks. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:15, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Sometimes you have no choice, based on how they are aired – The Adventures of Kid Danger is an example of this... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:19, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: That way works too, basically stating each airing event is an episode as the rule. It is consistent but a bit messy. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:25, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Boo!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Geraldo Perez:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Iggy (Swan) 17:12, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Dizagaox reported by User:Amaury (Result: ). Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:38, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Courtesy ping for IJBall as he is also somewhat involved, from what I saw. Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:38, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

As is probably clear, this is at WP:ANEW, not WP:ANI. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:47, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Lauren Lee Smith again

Disruptive editor is back at this article with the 'rowspan' violations, having ignored your previous posts to their Talk page and to the article's Talk page. Please keep an eye on this one for now. Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:01, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: If this continues after being requested to communicate a second time, the next step is to report this to WP:ANI. This editor seems to have issues with collaboration and has had previous blocks for DE and EW. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:32, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the heads up (and for your attempts at constructive engagement here...). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:34, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Legacies (TV series)#'Special guest star' vs. 'Guest' star section

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Legacies (TV series)#'Special guest star' vs. 'Guest' star section. I'd like to get your opinion on this too... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:09, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

I Am Frankie

I'm assuming by now you've seen all of the second season. What are your thoughts on it? Interested in them. You can read IJBall's thoughts here, but only click that if you're all caught up. Amaury (talk | contribs) 22:14, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: It is still on my queue to watch. I purchased the series and have downloaded it so I will be watching it. Had other stuff to binge watch first though. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:55, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Kel Mitchell

Geraldo, I need more eyes here. We have one or more IP's that keep changing the location of his home town, contrary to what's in the provided source. Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:19, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Hmmmm... except now I can't seem to find the source... Well, maybe you can figure out if I just made that up or not! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:31, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: these edits, using one of yours as a base mostly match. The change was made by this IP and the others moved it back to the way it was before. I don't see anything in that section that supports any of the info though. The information in question was originally added by this edit on July 30, 2017, without a reference. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:28, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Three Caballeros

Moved to Talk:The Three Caballeros § Category:Films about chickens

Henry Danger – Premiere Date

Feel free to merge this to the Henry Danger discussion at the episode list, but this is about the website in general as well. I feel like Premiere Date could be an okay source. Not the most perfect, but okay. While the Wikia is not reliable obviously, Premiere Date does agree with the Wikia that I linked to in the discussion in terms of where season four ends and season five starts. Plus, there was a one-week gap between "Flabber Gassed" and "Henry's Birthday," just like there was a one-week gap between "Swellview's Got Talent" (season 3 finale) and "Sick & Wired" (season 4 premiere). Thoughts?

Premiere Date was referenced in the summary of an edit I reverted earlier on the episode list. It's a website I do have bookmarked, and while they do reference things like the season five renewal to Nickalive, which is obviously WP:NOTRS, the premiere/finale dates for series seem to come directly from them, and they don't seem to be user editable like IMDb. I've used Premiere Date once over my years here, and while it was tagged with by Nyuszika7H (here), it wasn't outright removed, so it must be "okay," just like using Nickandmore's tweet for Star Falls' online release is "okay." (I discussed that one with IJBall, but I don't remember where the discussion took place.) Once we get something better, like TV Guide cleaning up the episode placements, per what IJBall said, or Zap2it updating with a season five section, we would of course go with either of those over Premiere Date, if Premiere Date is deemed okay for now to begin with. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:08, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: https://premieredate.news says "We monitor news and specialized resources to update our articles on a daily basis" which makes it look like a web scraper. One of its sources could very well be wikia or Wikipedia. It appears they do no fact checking on their own and just aggregate stuff they find on the net. I can't see it passing WP:IRS. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:32, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Js0822 edited in their "proof." You may wish to post there what you told me here regarding the web scraper. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:04, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Descendants (franchise)

Is it time to ask for protection here? We've gotten that same edit over and over again from a parade of IPs... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:02, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Disney Princess 11/09/18

Yes I purposely removed what I deleted under Aurora's section in the Disney Princess page. Its pointless to put information about Aurora being a "object" that they are all after when she is definitely a character. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starwarrior2014 (talk • contribs) 21:12, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

@Starwarrior2014: You need to leave a reason when you delete stuff from an article, particularly well-referenced information. The point was she was being treated as an object, not that she was one so the info looked valid in that context anyway. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:50, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

For you!

I'll let you get this one, as they ignored the intent my previous edit summary on the subject (in adding unsourced bio info to a WP:BLP, and in ignoring WP:STUBSPACING again...). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:12, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Cameron Seely

According to IMDb, that's the same Cameron Seely in both movies. If that's correct, then that WP:DABPAGE is erroneous, and looks like it needs to be deleted or converted to a redirect... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:56, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: But IMDb is not a source we can rely on for bio info so we officially don't know that unless there is some reliable source that states it is the same person. If it is the same person then the page should be a stub, but as a stub it will be deleted per WP:NACTOR. It used to be a redirect, there are two potential targets, why pick one over the other and what benefit does it serve to link her name in one movie article and get redirected to, what looks like to a reader, a totally irrelevant other movie article when they click on the name for information. If we make no determination that it is the same person and just say this name is mentioned in two places a DAB page is appropriate. That way if the name is linked it gets flagged as a link to a DAB page. If someone searches, they get at least some useful info. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:52, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

I dunno – I guess the question is: can you have a WP:DABPAGE when neither "subject" has an article?... And this situation is even worse, as this is likely a DABPAGE for the same person! I'm in the camp that thinks this one should just be deleted, but I don't know the process for this. (Would this situation fall under WP:RfD?...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:06, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: Use a regular AfD for a dab page. I wouldn't mind seeing it deleted as it is a bit of a kluge. I just do not want to see a redirect at that location and that seems to be a common result of delete discussions. A stub that met NACTOR would be best but don't think that is possible yet. I think a DAB page is OK without a link to at least one person's article as long as there is exactly one blue link per entry with something about the person at the target. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:21, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

 Done: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cameron Seely. I've never tried to delete a WP:DABPAGE before, so I have no idea what will happen here. But in this case, I think a DABPAGE causes more confusion than it solves... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:28, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Edit warring on Ice Age: Continental Drift

Hi. Sorry, I kept adding incorrect information as I did to Ice Age: Continental Drift. I believe that the live-action footage of the voice actors recording at the end is correct, but adding the category "Films with live-action and animation" is incorrect, so I better not do that again. Joeymiskulin (talk) 00:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@Joeymiskulin: This is footage of the actors not in character, not really part of the film itself. That category is more for films like Song of the South where there is strong integration throughout the film. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:46, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@Geraldo Perez:Yeah, but according to IMDb, the characters are singing We are (Family) with live-action footage of their voice actors in the recording booth in the first half of the credits. Sorry. Joeymiskulin (talk) 20:49, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@Joeymiskulin: That is the actors as themselves recorded voicing their parts. There are no live-action characters in the film. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:06, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@Geraldo Perez: Yeah, there are no live-action characters. Only actors recording their voices in the studio. It's like a behind the scenes documentary. Joeymiskulin (talk) 23:31, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Bizaardvark#Series over after three seasons?

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Bizaardvark#Series over after three seasons?. What do you think? (Ping IJBall and MPFitz1968, too.). Is that more definite or still wishy-washy. I'll be posting there shortly to clarify something. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:15, 17 November 2018 (UTC)