User talk:MPFitz1968/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Re: Backstage (2016 TV series)

It's facing the same issue Stuck in the Middle did with its time slot. Figured you'd know the best way to handle it. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:22, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: This is why I'm taking issue about having that timeslot column shown in the first place, and those two shows are good reason for not having it there if the network (Disney Channel, though by no means the only network that does this) is going to be moving the shows around a lot. Not sure about having the ratings tables altogether to reflect these shows' overall performance with viewers, since what is shown seems to focus on how well the shows do on a given night and time of the week, when often their original airings of episodes are happening at other times during the week. Note that next week, July 18 to 22, Stuck in the Middle has five new episodes scheduled, and obviously at least four of them will not be in their designated time slot. And there are way too many variables determining why a show is doing well with viewers in some weeks and not so well in others, but sometimes these inconsistent times (day of week and time) that they air are a big reason. In terms of dealing with the timeslot column, outside of getting rid of it, I'd go with what timeslots the network (again, Disney Channel in this case) announces regularly as when they air the new episodes. Naming the episode range in which these regular timeslots are in effect, even if not every episode in the range may air during the designated timeslot, is probably enough to distinguish the separate timeslots during a season, but we want to make sure it doesn't go into what Wikipedia is not ... particularly WP:NOTTVGUIDE. MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:57, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

It's the same case with Best Friends Whenever's second season premiere the following week: July 25–July 29.

But yeah, I agree. Anybody who keeps up with whatever show will pretty much always know when it's on, and almost all providers have ways to see when other showings are on. For example, there's a new episode of Kirby Buckets today at 1:00 PM (PDT) on Disney XD, but if I were, say, looking for an episode I missed, I'd pull up the DirecTV guide, hit info on Kirby Buckets and go to Other Showings. If someone is so worried about missing something, they can also set it up to record all episodes or all first airings/new episodes depending on what they want. As for the ratings, those are already available in the US viewers column in the episode table(s). The only difference in the specific ratings table is that it summarizes each season and provides averages so people don't have to go scrolling through the episode tables. Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:12, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

The time slot is supposed to be significant because it may affect the viewership numbers, but this was mainly designed for the big U.S. networks, and with something like Disney Channel changing around the time slots many times, it may not be so useful. nyuszika7h (talk) 19:51, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Adventures In Babysitting

I noticed that other DCOMs have live+7 ratings information so i figured why shouldn't this DCOM have that information since that information has already been released — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJJAK47 (talk • contribs) 07:38, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

@DJJAK47: The problem with the edits you submitted [1][2] was that it was clearly verbatim from the reference you cited [3]. Regardless of what you are trying to add to the article, the material must be summarized in your own words. Reporting specific figures (e.g., how many millions watched the movie) can be direct from the source or rounded, as long as how you word the information in the article to present those figures is not word-for-word, in whole or part, from where you got the information. Direct quotations may be used if you need to use the source's wording, but use cautiously because extensive quoting can also be a problem in terms of copyright. MPFitz1968 (talk) 08:06, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Re: Backstage (2016 TV series) (again)

Haha!

Going back to something you previously said, So I'll definitely get those two episodes improved. Thankfully there's a break till the next one on July 10. ;), you'll have plenty of time after the season's end with another big break. There are still episodes 12–15 to get or improve summaries for, and episodes 13–15 have yet to air in the US. :) Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:35, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

"Plays Well with Others" was on my to-do list, but watched the episode again so I could write a better summary. Finally added it to the article. MPFitz1968 (talk) 09:11, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

You must have taken a "How to Write a Good Summary" class in high school or college (if you're attending college)—in other words, an English class, haha! You're excellent at these. I also love writing, but how good I am at summaries particularly seems to vary from show to show. 100 Things to Do Before High School, where I wrote most of the summaries, albeit over the limit, I was excellent at, whereas with other shows, I can only do it with some episodes—for example, Nicky, Ricky, Dicky & Dawn episodes 16–17 and 21 from the second season, though I'm not that happy with episode 17 as with the others as it was noticeably shorter because I couldn't really think of what to write. And then there are shows where I can't really think of what to write at all, so I just take care of the director, writer, and guest star credits as well as the absences. Although that doesn't mean I never write summaries for those, but just not as often, which I guess kind of goes hand-in-hand with only doing it with some episodes. In any case, some examples that I can remember:

• Gamer's Guide to Pretty Much Everything episodes 12–13 from the first season.
• Game Shakers episode 15 from the first and currently only season.
• Kirby Buckets episode nine from the second season, though it wasn't really anything that special.

Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:42, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: Seems like ages since I was in college, but I definitely remember my freshman composition classes in college and a tough instructor. One thing he stressed was sticking to the topic sentence in the paragraph, or the thesis statement in the entire composition, and that the topic sentence and thesis must be specific enough to develop the paper effectively. I was terrible with writing for him LOL! Some things, though, I managed to work on improving over the years, particularly with grammar and conciseness.

Writing summaries for TV episodes here is a learning process for me, depending on what I'm writing about. To perfect it, though, I tend to watch episodes multiple times (thank goodness for "on demand" watching) so I can weigh what details are necessary to the plot and what ones aren't. Not sure I'll expand beyond episode summaries, but wouldn't mind checking out existing movie plots. A lot of plots seem to be pretty long, including the recent Adventures in Babysitting on Disney Channel. The guideline limits film plots to 700 words for most films, but sifting thru many details in films on what to keep and what to discard for the purpose of summarizing is a bit more challenging. And watching the film a number of times doesn't hurt either to get the plot improved.

Speaking of films, particularly in the DCOM family, I managed to watch a few of the older ones when Disney Channel was going thru the 99 before Adventures. One that really got my attention was Rip Girls from the year 2000, but I looked at the plot here, and it's terrible. I'm hoping to improve that one sometime, though it'll be a struggle with a bunch of Hawaii-based terms or places that are hard to spell, let alone remember. Hence, the need to watch the movie a number of times; I may purchase that one from Amazon before it becomes unavailable at either Watch Disney or my ISP. MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:20, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Mako: Island of Secrets

Well, Isabel Durant has a draft page! (But I'm not moving that to mainspace until Durant gets at least one more prominent TV or movie role... As of right now, she's short of passing WP:NACTOR, IMHO.) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Re: Rtkat and Grammar

I don't know if maybe you could provide some good tips for them, but one thing I often find them doing is removing semi-colons which are used instead of conjunctions, such as "and," when commas come before them—for example, it would be correct to say either I went to the store, and I got milk. or I went to the store; I got milk., but while it reads okay, it wouldn't be as correct to say I went to the store. I got milk.—and replacing them with periods, causing problems like sentence fragments, which are really unprofessional. They're no doubt a good-faith editor, but their grammar seems to be a weak area. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:49, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I recall working with Rtkat back in the Sam & Cat days, while trying to trim episode summaries there. Rtkat was more into putting as much detail into the summary as possible, and given how much action happened in an episode of that show, it's very tempting. But it makes the summary bloated, and no doubt is beyond the recommended length given in WP:TVPLOT. One example there is the episode "#MagicATM" (#21) (current version); look at how much detail is in that episode in a July 6, 2014 edit (associated diff which shows how much Rtkat added to it). I'm thinking they've mellowed a little with the over-detail since, at least from what I've noticed.

Regarding the grammar, I do allow some flexibility, but I do agree with you regarding the making of compound sentences into two simple ones (i.e., replacing a conjunction or a semicolon with a period) being a problem. It disrupts the flow of related ideas that are better expressed in one sentence rather than two or more. Turning them into sentence fragments is even worse, though Rtkat's edit that I reverted technically had two sentences (a subject and a verb is all that's needed for a sentence), but small sentences nevertheless are not very professional when an idea can be better expressed using more complex constuctions of a sentence. MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:23, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Re: List of Nicky, Ricky, Dicky & Dawn episodes

Now that I think about it, I think Tom was absent, so the typical Absent would be okay, just not the way the IP inserted it. It's repeating tonight at 5:00 PM on Nick East HD, so I'll skim through it again to double-check. Squishy Paws wouldn't be mentioned as absent, though, of course as he's not starring. I'm not even sure if he receives any type of credit, though I'm sure his owner gets paid for bringing him. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:51, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Backstage episode summary

What are the "...."s supposed to be here? – nyuszika7h (talk) 08:07, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

In watching the episodes, I've observed three concurrent stories being told involving the students that are pretty equal (give or take) in importance, unlike with many of the other shows on Disney Channel, where there's an A-story, B-story, etc., with the B-story and so on completely separate from the main plot (A-story), and usually unimportant. The ellipses represent a separation in those stories, and given that there are usually three, I find it better to use than using "meanwhile" or "on the other hand" or transitions like that on every single episode. MPFitz1968 (talk) 08:51, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I see. I'd use three instead of four though, which looks weird. :P nyuszika7h (talk) 09:57, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Why don't you like transitional words? Amaury (talk | contribs) 20:07, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I don't hate them, but if I'm gonna use "meanwhile", I'd rather use it only once and would work with two stories (main plot + subplot for example, like here or here). Once three or more stories are involved, other transitional words would be needed—a writer needs variety with his/her work. There's plenty of ways that three+ stories could be put into the summary, like what I have in Backstage now, use of (a)(b)(c) or (1)(2)(3) to enumerate the stories, or the transitional words. I just have the preference of not using transitional words in this case. MPFitz1968 (talk) 22:10, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

For a second, I thought this was you: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Backstage_%282016_TV_series%29&type=revision&diff=732737743&oldid=732734152 However, you always leave edit summaries and I can see some conventional issues there, so I guess I have to wait a little until you get to it. :P Just kidding, obviously. It's not like I'm drooling over the wait. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:35, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: That edit looks like it captured what happened in "Showtime", though with some spelling/grammar issues and sentence problems. I'm scratching my head about whether Vanessa actually "breaks her ankle" (she definitely could not go on after the jump, but even severe sprains will be enough to put someone out of action), so I'll need to revise that part as it isn't known exactly. I doubt that ice would help any if it were broken, and they were heavily icing her ankle at the end. In any event, I can definitely work with the edit instead of having to rewrite the whole thing. MPFitz1968 (talk) 01:26, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

There was definitely a cracking sound in that last move she did, but I don't think she necessarily broke it. Perhaps a really bad sprain. Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:29, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Jenna Ortega

Oops, I didn't revert far enough, even though I wanted to as you can see from my edit summary. Thanks for fixing it. nyuszika7h (talk) 21:40, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Re: Backstage (2016 TV series)

I was bold, but perhaps you can help as it didn't exactly work out how I wanted it to. See here. Amaury (talk | contribs) 04:47, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Apparently, the template in question (television season ratings) does not support hiding the timeslot column—there is no parameter called hide_timeslot nor any documentation that allows us to do so. In checking the talk page there, it seems there was a discussion about this, and it possibly violating WP:NOTTVGUIDE, but going thru the discussion showed it to go nowhere. But if we're gonna be able to hide this column, we're gonna need to bring that up on that talk page, but no doubt with the way Disney Channel moves the programming around (among other networks), that timeslot column is an eyesore. MPFitz1968 (talk) 05:09, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

I could add the option to hide the timeslot column, like I did with rank and TV season, but if you think it should be brought up on the talk page first, then I won't do it just yet. nyuszika7h (talk) 21:44, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Had been thinking about bringing up this issue on the template talk page, but I don't know. It certainly should be an option to hide that column, regardless of all the discussion over there about whether it violates WP:NOTDIR (as they put it). MPFitz1968 (talk) 21:55, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

OK, I added a subsection to that discussion over at the template talk page—Template_talk:Television_season_ratings#Timeslot, subsection "Hiding this column". May be a start, though I tended to focus on Disney Channel as my one example of a network that's not consistent with what night/time their shows air, though the point I'm making is about why there is no option to hide the column in the first place. MPFitz1968 (talk) 22:19, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Boy Meets World

Some of the major WP:TV editors don't like cast tables. While I don't think they should be "banned" or "deprecated" in toto, I'm sympathetic to the idea that they tend to "dominate" main TV series articles, and often work better if they're shifted over to [List of xxxx characters] or [List of xxxx cast] articles. What I'm getting at is – do you think the "cast table" at Boy Meets World should be shifted over to the List of Boy Meets World characters article, and replaced with a simple "text listing" back at Boy Meets World?... Just curious to hear your thoughts on this. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:12, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: I actually never thought about that since I haven't looked at a large array of TV articles and their corresponding characters/cast articles to get a better picture of it. But I wouldn't object having the table transferred to the characters article. I'm seeing what you're saying about the table's weight in the main article, and it may be a little bit too much in comparison to the other material about Boy Meets World, though I am currently neutral about whether to have the table there or not. One TV show I'm noting from my watchlist, Pretty Little Liars, has the table both in the main article and in the characters article. MPFitz1968 (talk) 22:26, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure I have a strong opinion about it either. I just know that they've been booted from other articles (e.g. CSI: Crime Scene Investigation used to have a cast table – List of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation characters still has a series of (complex!) cast tables...). In the specific case of Boy Meets World, the cast table there is "dominating" enough that it should probably be moved to List of Boy Meets World characters article. If I feel like it, I may "boldly" move it there... But, like I said – I'm not sure I feel that strongly about it. [shrug] --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:58, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: I think the difference here may be that it doesn't technically fall under WP:TVCAST since it's not counting how many episodes the actors are in, just their status in each season, but I could be wrong. Amaury (talk | contribs) 23:06, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

The impression I get is that there are some WP:TV regulars who want even stuff like that gone. In the specific case of List of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation characters, there are so many tables there that it's overkill, and they should probably be trimmed back to just the main cast list in table-form, with the rest converted to text. But I'm against a blanket "ban" on cast tables, as I think they often do convey useful information in a visually clear way. It's just that when the cast tables get to be "too dominating", they probably work better at the [List of xxxx characters] pages than they do at the "main" TV series article. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:25, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Followup

MPFitz1968, as per this recent discussion, I have gone ahead and moved the BMW cast table to List of Boy Meets World characters, as cast tables apparently have been deprecated at main TV series articles, but are still allowed at [List of xxxx characters] articles (a general precept I actually agree with!). What I have not done is added short text "character blurbs" back to the BMW main article (as I wasn't a regular viewer of that show...). Any chance you can give that a shot?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:47, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: I'm actually not sure what route to go with that—the cast list or a characters list. Complicating matters is the two portrayers of Morgan, so the cast list would be awkward. Also, I'm pretty sure the cast order in the infobox's "starring" list at the main article is not by order of credits as dictated in WP:TVCAST (I recall William Russ being last in the season one opening credits and Danielle Fishel wasn't even in those credits—she was recurring at the time). Someone else may have to verify the proper credit order, as I don't have access to the show thru my ISP/cable provider (Comcast); used to be on Freeform (ABC Family) but it's been moved to TeenNick, which I don't have. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:11, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Dang. TeenNick I do have (and had noticed that they were rerunning BMW), but verifying the cast order in every season would be a tall order... It does sound like going with a 'Characters' section, rather than a 'Cast and characters' set up, would probably be the better call at BMW. I'm not promising to get to that, but we'll see what happens... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:14, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

It looks like BMW is also airing on MTV2. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:22, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Nope, don't get that channel either. TeenNick and MTV2 (as well as Disney XD) are among those in a different TV package at Comcast that would cost me a bit more to be subscribed to. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:27, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm recording a few episodes over the next couple of days. I think these will get me the season #3 and #4 opening credits, so that I can start chipping away at the cast order issue. (What I really need to track down is a season #1 episode though...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:34, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Michael, you may not want to use it, but it is an option. There's a site called Putlocker.is that has episodes on a lot of things like Boy Meets World—search "Boy Meets World Putlocker." Charter Security Suite's search add-on also shows is it a safe site. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:44, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Amazon has the entire first season for $15 in SD, or $2 per individual episode. Sounds like getting that whole first season is a bargain, think I'll try that. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:46, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

That, of course, also works. :) Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:47, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Just purchased it, and got the cast order from the pilot episode in just minutes (I'm pretty sure it stays that way for the whole first season, but can make adjustments if necessary). About to update the infobox at the article. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:52, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Redux

Hey, MPFitz1968 – I just checked a couple of season 4 episodes of Boy Meets World and noticed something interesting – it looks like Lindsay Ridgeway and Anthony Tyler Quinn were only main credited for the episodes that they appeared in. I have no idea if this extends to the opening credits for the seasons before (e.g. season 3), or the seasons after (e.g. season 5 on). But I don't think think this is mentioned at the main article, or at the season 4 article... By any chance, have you noticed if this was an issue with other seasons of BMW?... Either way, it probably needs to be mentioned somewhere. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:42, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Posting here again, in case you didn't see this – last night, weird things were happening with Talk pages (e.g. I didn't get messaged last night even though somebody else posted to my Talk page...). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:59, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: This is common practice for many U.S. shows on the big networks, though if others are still credited when absent, it might be worth a mention. nyuszika7h (talk) 22:28, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

@Nyuszika7H: It's actually not – in fact, it's very, very uncommon practice (esp. for broadcast network shows). Usually, main cast is credited in the show's opening, even for episodes they don't appear in (Melrose Place jumps immediately to my mind as a show where not every cast member appeared in every episode, but were still credited in the opening credits regardless). That's why it was so glaring when I noticed Boy Meets World doing it. Now, I'm not saying that BMW is the only show to have ever done this – but, like I said, it's very unusual... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:33, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@IJBall: The first message came in OK. Regarding Ridgeway and Quinn, whom you mentioned are listed in the main credits only when they appear in the episode, and whether that practice is used in seasons other than the fourth, I can't say. I only have access to the season one episodes, and it's quick to assume the listing of the cast is the same in every episode for a season, which is obviously a wrong assumption. On whether to mention these anomalies with the credits, that's a grey area especially with how the television project as a whole is addressing episode counts of cast, absences, etc. While each episode serves as the primary source for the corresponding listing in the show's episode list, making a general statement about a whole season (cast absences by way of not listing them in an episode's credits) would need sourcing from all the episodes involved. I'm thinking if the two actors are listed in the main credits for at least one episode of the season, then they are in the main cast for that season, but if it's only a small percentage of episodes, then addressing the absences really becomes an issue. Don't know if listing all the episodes, by name, the two are present in would be a better route—that is much easier to verify by looking at each episode's credits, but it may clutter up the article if presented as a list, plus there's the problem of the sourcing (without inline cites, since we are using the episodes' broadcasts as the primary sources, it would take time to verify and lessens the effectiveness of combating things like sneaky vandalism to the article). But no doubt, interesting that Ridgeway and Quinn are listed in some episode of season four. MPFitz1968 (talk) 22:31, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, but I don't think adding a parenthetical or note the their entry in the 'Cast' list – "only credited for episodes they appeared in" – is going to break any WP:TV guideline. That's what I was thinking of adding to the season 4 cast list... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:36, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

A lot simpler. I don't see anything wrong with that. MPFitz1968 (talk) 22:42, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Re: Austin & Ally - myTab & My Pet

Yup! That episode aired yesterday and it's how he pronounces his name, similar to Dewey/Doy on Girl Meets World. Amaury (talk | contribs) 07:46, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: I noticed the pronunciation watching that episode. I did see another episode in the list (right before it in fact, "Burglaries & Boobytraps") where he's also shown in the guest starring credits. I didn't touch that one as I haven't (re)watched the episode, but I'll guess in those credits, there are three L's in his name again. MPFitz1968 (talk) 08:05, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Bunk'd Season Two

So the second season will be a week of premieres just like Best Friends Whenever's second season premiere and Stuck in the Middle's season one's last five episodes. However, unlike the others, there are only four days of premieres instead of five. Curious if you have even a theory as to why they're starting the second season on Tuesday, August 23, 2016, making for a total of four weekday airings instead of five if they were to start on Monday, August 22, 2016? Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:40, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

I can't say. The Olympics end on August 21, so I'd rule that out. Don't know of any big programs scheduled on other cable or broadcast TV networks for August 22. Perhaps the first four episodes of the new season of Bunk'd are part of a story arc (with the first and fourth episodes having the word "Weasel", or some spelling variation of that, in their title). Just guesses. The TV listings I have don't quite go out that far, so I'd have no idea what Disney Channel has scheduled on the 22nd. MPFitz1968 (talk) 19:00, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

To be more accurate, the week of August 21–27. :P But yeah, obviously, only Disney Channel would know. Just seeing if you had any theories. :) Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:50, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Tyne Stecklein

Another query of your opinion – does Tyne Stecklein look notable enough to you to merit their own Wikipedia article? 'Cos glancing at that on my end, I don't see it... TIA. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:48, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Hardly any sourcing, and the one reliable, independent source just gives passing mention regarding Dancing with the Stars. Her listed filmography, plus other movie mentions in the article, is far from satisfying WP:ENT. So, simple answer on notability: no.

Even doing a simple Google search on any news articles about her is pretty much passing mentions or in the context of her being partnered with Bill Nye the Science Guy on DWTS. Clearly fails notability. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:17, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! I have {{Notability}} tagged the article in the interim. I'm taking a real-life dictated break from WP:AfD right now, but I've added this one to my BLPs with problematic notability list which means sooner or later I'll get to it. However, I think it could be argued that boldly redirecting to Dancing with the Stars (U.S. season 17) is in order here if anyone else wants to do that instead... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:35, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Re: Henry Danger (Bad Amaury!)

I'm the one who wrote the summary, too. Michael, will you please hit me in the head with a hammer? Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:58, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Henry Danger Season 3

But the information of henry danger season 3 was on instagram, twitter and wikia. Hsm foreverr (talk) 18:11, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

If you don't want me to edit it you do it if you don't believe it search it by yourself, please! Hsm foreverr (talk) 18:14, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Let me stop you there. Those three sources are considered unreliable per WP:USERG or WP:SELFSOURCE. If you can provide a reliable source for your information, and add that as an inline citation to your edit, it will be acceptable. Otherwise, please don't add it back into the article. MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:16, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Just mean i have to ptove that it was true Hsm foreverr (talk) 18:17, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Right, so find information from a reliable source, like The Futon Critic or Zap2it; otherwise, we can't include it. Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:19, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Ok thanks, Amaury Hsm foreverr (talk) 18:22, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Why you delete that link to instagram? Hsm foreverr (talk) 19:01, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

My edit summary is perfectly clear on the why. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:01, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

I mean instagram is also a account for henry danger Hsm foreverr (talk) 19:17, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Revival (Selena Gomez album)

I would remove "dance-pop" which is not given sources but admin reverted back. 123.136.111.62 (talk) 04:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Step by Step

Re: This edit – Do we really think Step by Step is a "children's series"? --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:36, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

It was part of ABC's T.G.I.F. lineup in the 1990s, but now that I'm recalling, there were some mildly suggestive dialogue, particularly between Frank and Carol, that was less appropriate for that young an audience. I don't know if it received TV-PG throughout its run, but from what I just said, definitely more teen-oriented. I'll go ahead and revert the edit in question. MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:52, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Stuck in the Middle

Oops, I don't know why I wrote WP:TVPLOT, thanks for correcting it. nyuszika7h (talk) 16:18, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Wikipedia loading issues

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Wikipedia loading issues. I'm trying to see if there are any others affected. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:37, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Edits to "Adventures in Babysitting (2016 TV movie)"

I received alerts about disruptive and non constructive editing on this page, but all I changed was adding and replacing more accurate recapping of the movie than what was already there, which I felt was very poor and in some ways completely wrong and made up to make the synopsis flow easier. I didn't put in anything false or made up, much less inappropriate or offensive. I don't think there is anything wrong with what I did, nor was it too much detail. I have seen countless movie synopses on wikipedia that were much longer and detailed than what I put into this page, as well. I'd appreciate it if you allowed the changes I made, as I enjoy writing and worked hard to make a well written and correct recap of the events. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.236.104 (talk) 21:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @76.98.236.104: WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Knock it off with the disruption or you potentially face a block. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:56, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) There is a reason WP:FILMPLOT is in the guidelines, and the fact that many articles about films are over the recommended plot length doesn't mean that they can't be improved to concisely summarize the films. Going into intricate detail about what happens or how it happens doesn't help the plot, and while reading the version of the Adventures in Babysitting plot just now, before your edit(s), I actually got lost about what it was saying. It does need improvement, but lengthening the already too long plot doesn't necessarily do that. MPFitz1968 (talk) 21:57, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

I have worked hard to properly correct the recapping on the page for this movie. What I am doing is not destructive, and I only deleted large portions after my edits were removed. What I replaced it with is still the original writer's synopsis, with my corrections that make it more accurate. I didn't add anything to it that isn't true. It also was not made any longer than many other wikipedia movie synopses I have seen here in the past, so I don't understand why my edit isn't being allowed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.236.104 (talk) 22:06, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Alright, I read the plot synopsis guidelines, but I do not feel I violated it, except maybe by the technical character count. Other than that, I did not include minutiae like dialogue or jokes that were not pivotal to the plot's progression. I feel that what I did makes it easier to understand, opposed to the previous version you even said was confusing. Try reading my version now, too. Thank you, and I am not trying to be rude.

-Zack — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.236.104 (talk) 22:14, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

@76.98.236.104: I already find myself confused when reading in the first paragraph, "Helen Anderson (Gillian Vigman) calls Jenny's phone for the second time that day, begging for a last-minute babysitter, or another trusted name given that Jenny declined due to already having a baby sitting client that night." And that's among other problems with grammar and tone in your edits. Regarding that one sentence I cited—and I'll make note I have seen the movie—I would say you're right, but how would you explain your version of the summary to a reader who hasn't seen the movie, nor even watches Disney Channel? If they were to come across this summary when looking at info about this movie, they would be lost in reading it just like I would be, probably more so, and likely would be turned off by how long it is. That's why there's a word limit, and the fact that other articles about films have summaries that are also above the limit, as I said before, doesn't mean they cannot be improved. This is not just for word count; it is to relay to readers exactly what the movie is about, which is the bottom line that we are trying to achieve with Wikipedia—informing the readers without confusing them. You may want to read your version of the plot summary and see it from the point of view of someone who hasn't seen the movie. WP:RF. MPFitz1968 (talk) 23:03, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I do agree about it being confusing still. But as far as that sentence you quoted, that's the thing- that sentence is still confusing because even I didn't drag it out to elaborate about how Helen first called one time, Jenny answered and said she was booked and then after failing to have her sister do it she called again after Lola already accidentally got Jenny's phone. Also, I feelt it was important tot note that the professor wasn't asking for Jenny the second time, but another name which is why Lola gave her own. But regardless I can understand if you just want it to say she was calling for the first time, I don't really care anymore at this point.

And I know I left some of the plot flow confusing overall, because I can't remember some details that brought one scene to the next scene (which is also why I didn't even mention the rap battle thing because I couldn't recall where and how them running into there exactly worked in). In fact, the reason I came to the wikipedia page was to clarify some of the details I couldn't recall, as I have done in the past with other movies, and in such cases appreciate the detailed synopses here. Not only did the article not include that scene either, but there were blatantly wrong facts and statements that I wanted to clarify. Also, the tone is confusing because I actually tried to keep as much of the original writer's wording and synopsis as possible except for the parts I needed to add. I don't think talking about a reader who hasn't seen it is fair because in that case, this isn't the kind of synopsis they would want anyway. The way it was before my edits still spoiled many plot points and resolutions, in that sense you would want a shorter, overall attention grabbing summary like you find on the imdb website. But personally, wikipedia has always been for different, more in depth and all encompassing plot summaries.

But anyway, I know I just changed it again, and that was before seeing your most recent message. I won't change it again, but maybe in the future I will privately make my own in a less confusing manner and send it to you first. I'm sorry for being so stubborn though for something that really isn't such a big deal in the big picture anyway. 76.98.236.104 (talk) 00:20, 8 September 2016 (UTC) Zack

Re: Netflix

First, you still need to improve the BS E15 summary. #SorryNotSorryForBuggingYouAboutThis

You mean to tell me shows don't stay on Netflix? Wow! :O Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:19, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: I remember when Wizards of Waverly Place and Shake it Up were on Netflix (back in 2013) - no longer LOL. I even remember watching a movie recently (A Walk to Remember), the day before I knew it was scheduled to be leaving Netflix, and sure enough the next day, it was gone from their listing. And about that "Showtime" episode at Backstage, I know I have that on my to-do list. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:36, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Re: Girl Meets World

It may need another protection. That IP range is the Volvo vandal, which is a long-term abuse IP. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:33, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Gonna keep my eye on the article (as I always do), and I do have semiprotection in mind as well. Have given the latest IP a final warning, but I just realized that they are definitely evading a block - similar IP that you reverted in the article not more than 24 hours ago is still on a block right now. MPFitz1968 (talk) 01:48, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Backstage main cast absences

On a semi-related note, you're more than welcome to care of absences as well for Backstage just like you do at other articles, LOL! Or are you not familiar enough yet with who's who? :) Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:22, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: I tried updating absences for the first time in Backstage (episode 24 - "Ensemble"). Found it way more difficult than doing that for Girl Meets World, for example, since there are multiple absences of main cast per episode. I usually can spot who is absent in the episodes, but updating the list, especially the tally at the beginning of the episodes section, is another issue. MPFitz1968 (talk) 06:55, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I can see how. It took me a while at first, too, since this is similar to Degrassi in that, on top of what you said occurring a lot of the time, there can be characters seen, but they don't say anything. (That and I also had to get familiar with who was who and what they looked like, particularly Jenna.) For example, Carly and Jenna were shown at the end of Step Up, so they count as present, but there were no lines spoken by them. Now I can just go down the character list on the article and go "present, present, absent, present, present..." or any form of and so on. Feel free to ask me to double check anytime, and I usually do, anyway, when I update it. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:16, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

On the subject of Backstage, while I realize the viewers aren't as important for this show since Disney got it cheap, as IJBall mentioned somehwere, they're doing a crappy job at advertising it. Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:41, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

It's worse than that – tonight's (Friday night) new episode is airing at 11pm. Clearly Disney doesn't care how this show does, and is using it purely as "filler"... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:43, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: They seemed to care for the first half of season one, even having reruns for a while, so I don't know why they suddenly don't, or at least don't appear to. I mean, they have a special hashtag for it while episodes are airing. It's still a good show, though, regardless of how it's aired, but it would certainly be interesting to see the viewership data for the Canadian airings to compare. Unfortunately, there isn't a Showbuzz Daily or whatever equivalent in Canada. However, the viewers honestly aren't that bad, in my opinion, at least compared to other networks, like Disney XD, but, again, I feel like Disney XD uses a different rating system as to what's considered "good" ratings. Anyway, using yesterday's episode, writing it out gives us 669,000 viewers, which is still a lot.

Yes, the remainder of the season one episodes are showing at 11:00 PM—fortunately, for me, I can watch them three hours earlier since I pretty much always watch the East feeds of channels on DirecTV where available since the West feeds don't have HD available for some reason—with the exception of the last episode. It is being shown on October 1 at 12:30 AM, so technically speaking, the current air date wrong, haha, even though that would make it September 30 at 9:30 PM for me on the East feed. Before tonight, it was at 6:00 PM with a repeat at 11:00 PM, but now you only have one chance to watch new episodes, or two if you have West and East feeds. Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:09, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Backstage no longer top 150

At least for "After the Flood." So I asked for the viewership data here Archived 2016-09-30 at the Wayback Machine in the comments like others have done for shows like Gamer's Guide to Pretty Much Everything and Kirby Buckets since they often don't make the top 150, and Mitch said it was a rerun, which isn't correct. Either there was a mix-up or I didn't explain myself properly. Perhaps you or Nyuszika7H could help out. Thanks! Amaury (talk | contribs) 06:42, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: You are definitely right about the fact Disney Channel is airing each episode ("After the Flood" and beyond) only once, and I did verify the schedule at Zap2it [4]. The late airing time (11:00pm ET ... though midnight where I am where I get the west coast feed) may be the reason it is not ranking in the top 150. MPFitz1968 (talk) 06:51, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

It's such a shame that they're basically ruining a good show. But since we're on the subject of ratings, for Disney Channel, would you consider the viewers for Liv and Maddie's season four premiere good? (I'm gonna be evil and make you look for it. Mwahahaha!) Amaury (talk | contribs) 06:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Doesn't seem to be too bad - 14th in the overall list for Sept. 23 (18-49) - and in terms of the viewership numbers itself, from what I saw in the episode list, there have been lower numbers. Not sure if the Liv and Maddie: Cali Style premiere boosted Girl Meets World's numbers (1.77 million for "Girl Meets She Don't Like Me" vs. series low 1.42 million for "Girl Meets the Great Lady of New York" the week before when Bunk'd was the lead-in). Still, this is only the first week a new episode of L&M has aired on Friday in a long time (don't know if additional episodes other than its premiere way back in 2013 have aired on Friday), so can't make a case for just one week here. MPFitz1968 (talk) 07:12, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Henry Danger's third season, Game Shaker's second season, and School of Rock's second season all seem to be doing good so far, particularly the former two. Disney Channel's ratings, however, if you look at K.C. Undercover's second season and Bizaardvark's first season seem to flop back and forth more and don't stay kind of consistent like Nickelodeon's ratings do, likely for theories brought up here, which you're welcome to contribute to if you'd like. So if they take Watch Disney's ratings into account, which I hope they do, then they're doing fine. And for the cable and satellite ratings, the average viewership data of 1.60 million for K.C. Undercover's second season is pretty good, though I'm not so sure about Bizaardvark's 1.38 million average viewers. It's a good number for episodes individually, but for an average, I'm not quite sure. Amaury (talk | contribs) 13:49, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

So, small correction: it was still in the top 150, but because Disney Channel removed the 6:00 PM showing last minute, they were still showing the 11:00 PM as a rerun, and so, it wasn't included in the charts. Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:01, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Would you check "Try Again" again (LOL!) for guest stars? There are currently no guest stars listed, but I definitely know Austin was there. Unfortunately, I already deleted the recording before checking that, but I know you can access Watch Disney. So can I, but I'm not really going to be available to until late this afternoon because of college. Thanks. Amaury (talk | contribs) 13:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Sure. I was gonna check that episode anyway since I didn't see the guest stars listed. Austin is obviously in there, as I see he's mentioned in the summary. MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:List of The Thundermans episodes#Thundermans: Secret Revealed is a special

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of The Thundermans episodes#Thundermans: Secret Revealed is a special. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Fuller House

Thanks for rejecting SPN-86's newest shot in their edit war in Fuller House (TV series), the only thing they've done. You got in there while I was typing my reason into the field! Will that bozo get your message? --Thnidu (talk) 23:09, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

@Thnidu: Just sent that user a note on their talk page regarding WP:NPOV. MPFitz1968 (talk) 23:10, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Ah, you're much politer and more restrained — and more specific — than I would have been. This is something I can learn from. Thanks again. --Thnidu (talk) 03:34, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Crashletes/List of Crashletes episodes

I just finished going through this as well as splitting the article and was wondering if you and Nyuszika7H could be so kind as to check the ratings and make sure I added and rounded them correctly on both articles? Doing 22 of them, there's a chance for mistakes. It doesn't have to be done all at once as I understand that it can take a while, so feel free to make checkpoints and take breaks. Also, the series sadly did not make the top 150 for the airing on July 22, 2016, so those ratings are currently unavailable. I did make a comment Archived 2016-10-07 at the Wayback Machine here on the top 150 list for yesterday's ratings (October 6), hoping that Mitch Salem still has the data, but I'm not really getting my hopes up, so perhaps you guys could see if you can find the ratings for that day as a preemptive. Unfortunately, the Showbuzz Daily article was not archived, and I couldn't find anything on Zap2it's TV by the Numbers section. Although just for the sake of reference, here Archived 2016-07-28 at the Wayback Machine is the top 150 for July 22, 2016.

Also, here's an image that can be used on the main article if either of you also want to help out there. I'm still a newbie there. http://superjacket.com/wp-content/uploads/Crashletes-logo-thumbnail-1.jpg Thanks in advance, my friends!

On an unrelated note, though it's related to the series, one thing I find odd is that "Eaton It," which aired on September 9, 2016, is the season one finale. I mean, it does have a season one production code, but obviously that doesn't really matter. The article does say the airing for September 16, 2016—"Gym Nasty"—is the season two premiere, but it's just a bit odd considering there was a short hiatus after the episode on July 28, 2016. The way it went, it would make more sense for "Eaton It" to be the season two premiere since all new episodes from that one (September 9, 2016) and onward are airing weekly on Fridays rather than daily like before, and also because there's always a break of at least a month between season premieres and finales. Perhaps the article mentioning the renewal made a mistake somewhere. I don't know. It has a publication date of September 1, 2016, which is also a bit odd as I don't think networks would renew a show and then start airing the next season two weeks and one day after the announcement. Although that may really be more with just sitcoms as Crashletes is an unscripted series, so it doesn't really take that much time to film. I'm just going to leave season one containing 19 episodes for the time being as that seems like the safest bet based on what we've got now. Amaury (talk | contribs) 06:03, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury:  Done Checked viewership info in both articles, and their sources. Looks good and correct between the two articles. MPFitz1968 (talk) 06:58, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Let It Shine

Hey, MPFitz1968 – can you take a look at the cast list in the 'Cast' section of Let It Shine? I have never seen that TV movie, but at least a few of the entries in the cast list there look trivial, and I'm guessing they're not including in the cast listing at the start of the film... Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:15, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: Still rusty on how film credits should be presented, and who should be (according to significance of roles per WP:FILMCAST), but I did take a look at both the opening and closing credits of Let It Shine, reordered the cast list according to the order presented in both credits (consistent up to Courtney B. Vance ... the last listed in the opening credits), removed one name I couldn't find in either set of credits, and took out the ones listed as members of the choir who are not identified by proper names. (diff) I'll admit, I haven't ever watched this movie from start to finish yet, so I'd be hard-pressed to figure out which roles at the bottom of the list (past Vance, who again ends the opening credits) are significant. MPFitz1968 (talk) 22:12, 9 October 2016 (UTC)