User talk:Amaury/2016/November

2016 Archive Index: January • February • March • April • May • June • July • August • September • October • November • December

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Amaury. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

User Orchomen

Related discussions: User Orchomen from September 2016 • User Orchomen from October 2016

Extensive Discussion

@IJBall: I just saw your concern about our little friend at List of Liv and Maddie characters possibly being Orchomen at work again evading their block and not making improvements. I'll ping MPFitz1968 and BU Rob13 and see if they think 37.245.189.16 as well as 94.200.67.94 are of Orchomen. I'll also ping Callmemirela as they were also heavily involved in this last time. See also: User talk:IJBall#List of Liv and Maddie characters. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:48, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

One of those is a range used by Orchomen and the other geolocates to the same area. Definitely him. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 14:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. If the pattern does in fact continue, then yes, it's Ochoromen. I knew him quitting sockpupetting was just a bunch of BS. In fact, I noticed on Orchomen's talk page, he was socking on his own talk page ([1]). The IP was only used to test Orchomen's talk page, but the location still remains in UAE. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 14:55, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Please continue to ping me if you see him, as I'm tailoring some methods of preventing his disruption. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:05, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: You bet, Rob! Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:07, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

BU Rob13, Callmemirela: I'm seeing the edit history at Orchomen's talk page, and Orchomen has been making a lot of unconstructive edits to their talk page space since the block (particularly from October 23 on). Wouldn't this warrant disabling their talk page privileges? MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:23, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Indeed. Doing now. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:26, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Seems Orchomen has returned with an old IP as I was replying to BU Rob13 [2]. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 16:39, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Yep – step away from the computer for 4 hours, and this happens!... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:27, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: I have a suspicion our user at Paradise Run right now might be Orchomen based on the edit summaries, but I'm not too sure and am going to hold off for now. @MPFitz1968: Does that user geographically locate to the same area as our little sock puppet? Amaury (talk | contribs) 13:50, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: In situations like these, I'd let Admin BU Rob13 know, as he seems to be on this case, and can look into details... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:58, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Based on the contribution history and topics edited by that user, I think it's quite probable that it's Orchomen. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:00, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: Is this our "friendly" little sock puppet? Letting you know of any suspicions as you requested. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: As that's a registered account, there is no ability for just anyone, including me, to geolocate the user. That's left to a checkuser to find out, but you'd have to start a sockpuppet investigation. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:01, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Probably wouldn't be a bad idea to start an WP:SPI now – Orchomen should probably be "on file", especially if they're going to keep at this... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:04, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: Would you like to take care of that? I've got classes beginning in 14 minutes and also feel you'd do a better at explaining everything that's been going on in this situation. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:16, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

SPI filed. You are welcome to contribute to the report. MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:53, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: They're back with 37.245.170.213. Amaury (talk | contribs) 13:50, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

And 5.38.31.4 most likely. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:14, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

I think User:The Temple would be another one. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 03:21, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

@Callmemirela: Unfortunately, since it's a user, the only way to find out if it's Orchomen would be via Check User. @KrakatoaKatie: You were kind enough to help us out last time here. Can you tell us if this user is another sock puppet? Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:33, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

I need some behavioral evidence first. Refresh me - what does this guy do other than harass you guys? How can this redlinked account's two edits be connected to Orchomen? Katie^talk 11:23, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

@KrakatoaKatie: IJBall, especially, as well as MPFitz1968 and Callmemirela, can provide some more details, but, basically, they'll just look for any edits of ours and then revert them as retaliation for getting their sock master, Orchomen, blocked, who in turn is a sock puppet of someone else, but IJBall can't really figure out who it is. It doesn't matter what the edits are, either, as it could be edits reverting vandalism. (And if you take a look at the archived discussion from October of the same subject from the link above, Michael mentioned that they seem to just go by the newest edit as they reverted ClueBot once when trying to revert us.) IJBall came to me for help which then led to all three of us getting involved; also, Geraldo Perez and Nyuszika7H were involved as well, but I believe they only reverted GP once and neither GP nor Nyu got involved in the battle when they used a numerous amount of IPs to evade their block like they may be starting to again now with the two IPs listed above as well as this new IP: 37.245.179.214. Michael can tell you where they all geographically locate to as I don't remember. IJBall also provided links to interaction reports when I reported the incident to AN/I. BU Rob13 has been helping us the whole time and actually has something in place to help alleviate, if not completely stop, the sock puppets' damage. He can send you an email if he wishes as he doesn't want it posted here. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:31, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

5.38.31.4, 37.245.170.213, 37.245.179.214 all geolocate to UAE, but looking at the latitude/longitude info I got, the one starting with 5 is a significant distance away from the others (55.7 E longitude, compared to 54 E ... roughly 100-120 miles distance). Amaury, finding out where these IPs geolocate to is as simple as going to their contributions page, and on the bottom, there is a "Geolocate" link, plus an alternate link if the first one doesn't work. (And just as I'm typing this, I did use that alternate link, and it shows all three addresses geolocating to Dubai, UAE, with the same latitude/longitude coordinates.) MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:43, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: Maybe I've been blind. Thanks! Useful for future reference. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:09, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

The Temple is

Confirmed to Orchomen. No comment about the IP addresses. In general, geolocation is very useful to us when making blocks, not jut checkuser blocks. Except in the UK, where it is notoriously unreliable and even blatantly false. Katie^talk 17:45, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, KrakatoaKatie! :) Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:09, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

@KrakatoaKatie: Plan on blocking the sock sometime soon? Sro23 (talk) 19:10, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Welp. I did that from the CU page and got the confirmation, but it didn't go. He's blocked now. Thanks. :-) Katie^talk 19:44, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

I will offer my history with Orchomen. What Amaury said pretty much summed it up. I don't know how and when it started. I originally followed the drama through an ANI thread filed by I believe Amaury (someone correct me if I am wrong). Orchomen continued to edit war after I revert their edits to advise them to stop. They continued and continued until they got blocked. Not too long after, an IP reverted the edit. That IP got blocked. Then another one popped up and another and another (this was probably to over a dozen IPs at this point), but this time reverting more than just reverts. Now they were reverting Amaury's, IJBall's, Sro23, MPFitz's and my edits. I would have half a dozen notifications saying that my edits were reverted on articles the IP or Ochomen had not edited. It was constant back-and-forth until the IP was blocked. My only assumption is that Orchomen went through our contributions list and just had their finger glued on the undo link. Finally, Orchomen was block indefinitely for serial socking. Then a week later with over a dozen socks, they admitted to the socking and promised to stop. It sounded like a bunch of malarkey to me. Sure enough, I was right. More and more IPs came in and it seems it's still ongoing. Their MO is to revert edits from the users involved or return to old articles they had edited and would just revert to get their way. More than 95% of the socks geolocate to the UAE. I remember once it geolocated to Austria, but it was confirmed to be Orchomen. The most recent edit war I remember is on List of Liv and Maddie characters. Sadly, we cannot hide contributions. For this case, I am more than certain that it would have been done ages ago and we wouldn't have to go through the constant edit wars and blocking. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 21:44, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

That latest IPv6 sock who vandalized your talk page, Amaury, geolocates to New York. Certainly strange considering most other IP socks associated with Orchomen have geolocated to UAE. MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:17, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't think it was Orchomen. Then again, they reverted some of Amaury's edits on other talk pages, so I don't know. I really wish someone would create an option to hide contributions of certain users to prevent further wikihounding. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 15:21, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Agreed, per what I said at the end of the October portion of this discussion. MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:25, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

MPFitz1968, Callmemirela, yeah, that was a sock puppet—or, rather, a meat puppet—of someone else highly likely unrelated to Orchomen. They were vandalizing Cyphoidbomb's talk page, which I watch, so I was just helping out; then they came over here as retaliation. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:47, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

IJBall, MPFitz1968, and Callmemirela, they are at it again on The Lodge. I've already requested protection of the article and pointed to the discussion here as well as to BU Rob13 since he has been helping us from the very beginning. Obviously, Orchomen has nothing better to do with their life. Amaury (talk | contribs) 06:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

And it looks like Jagger Eaton's Mega Life may become another one, where they outright vandalized it by removing the bullet points. Amaury (talk | contribs) 06:59, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: You got any more tricks up your sleeve? Seems to have picked up again. I'll make a list when I can, but you can have a look at my contributions to see the IPs I've reverted from our ranges of interest. They all locate to the UAE as usual. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:07, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

If you could put together a subpage of your userpage with all known IPs (including previous ones), I'll discuss it with a CheckUser. I'm about ready to use range blocks, but I need a better idea of what ranges they're editing from. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@KrakatoaKatie: Now that you're in on what's going on, just wanted to say thanks for the help today! It's very much appreciated! :) Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:29, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome. I dropped a rangeblock, so there shouldn't be quite as big a problem for a while. If you get me a list from that 5.x.x.x range, I can look at blocking that one too. I just didn't have the time to look myself. :-) Katie^talk 15:34, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@KrakatoaKatie: A range block is something BU Rob13 wanted to avoid due to the range and tried other methods which I can't discuss publicly, but it had to be done. I think it was something to do with those ranges starting with 31 or 37 being pretty common ranges, so it would block quite a number of users. In regard to the IP list, and this is directed at you as well, Rob, since you mentioned it above, MPFitz1968 is your man for that as he kept and likely still has been keeping track of the IPs, so pinging him as I'm sure he'd be more than happy to help and compile a list, as well as provide links to other discussions on the matter if necessary, when he can. I'm about to start classes, so I will not be here for a while. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:14, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm probably gonna need to be caught up to speed on these IPs. Aside from what I compiled at User talk:BU Rob13/Archive 5#User:Orchomen IP socks about a month ago, it's gonna be trying to find large needles in a haystack. The 37.245.*.* range is one of those I found in that set which are being reported here in recent comments. I don't see either the 94 ones or the 5 ones in that initial list. (On an unrelated side note, I'm hoping this summer is gonna end soon - what is Denver doing getting close to 80 degrees in November?) MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Regarding that 94.200.67.* one (Amaury mentioned 94.200.67.94 at the start of this month's discussion), I just looked at the contributions for 94.200.67.90 in particular, and seems this behavior of reverting edits made by any one particular editor across multiple articles (in this case User:Kamran the Great) is not really new. These occurred back in July into August, and looking at edit histories for at least a couple of the articles in their contribution list—Dubai Water Canal and Marine resources conservation, in particular, and perhaps others but I didn't go thru all of them—shows similar connections with other IP ranges that we've been seeing ... like 176.204.*.*, 31.218.*.* and 37.245.*.* ... who take turns in reverting reverts in these articles, like how it's happening in the articles we are focusing on. MPFitz1968 (talk) 20:52, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

KrakatoaKatie, BU Rob13, MPFitz1968, here are all the IPs I reverted with this recent attack:

Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:39, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I'll create a sub-page if you'd still like, Rob, when I have some more time, but hopefully this list of IPs from the recent attack is helpful. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:51, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

The range I blocked was 37.245.176.0/20, which gets almost all of the IPs above. That's 4K IP addresses with very, very few contributions other than harassing you guys for the last 30 days. I could go with 37.245.160.0/19 and get all the IPs above that begin with 37 but I don't think that's necessary right now. I'd rather stay narrow as possible. The other range is 5.38.30.0/23, 512 users with one good edit out of 30 total since November 1. Same ISP as the 37 range. I'm going to leave that alone for now but if you get more trouble, ping me and I'll take another look. Katie^talk 19:56, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm putting this here for now, but will move it to my talk page if it turns out to be our "good" ol' friend. Although it's been some days, I had to revert them again today on School of Rock. The only articles they've edited are those that I'm watching and some of you guys are watching. Check out my message regarding Henry Danger on Michael's talk page for a bit more detail. What do you think? I think it's worth keeping an eye on unless you already feel convinced it could be them. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:54, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: Now this one does seem suspicious... Not conclusive yet, as there are definitely IP editors that only focus on grammar, wording, and copyediting. But definitely worth monitoring in this case – the real tipoff will be if they start changing "among" to "between": then you'll know with some certainty that it's you-know-who again. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:37, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: OK, upgrading the likelihood that this is you-know-who to

Likely based on more recent contribution stalking. If you want to pass this along to an Admin, feel free. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:53, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

I'll be keeping the discussion here until we know for sure, but I've gone ahead and created a sub-page here to list Orchomen's sock puppets. So far I've only included Lochagos and the IPs from that last attack. I will be working on adding more, but please add any that you've kept track of from wherever, such as the AN/I report. MPFitz1968 and Callmemirela, anything you guys have logged as well would be most appreciated. Also, you guys are more than welcome to add other information to that sub-page rather than just having the accounts and IPs listed, such as interaction reports. Thanks, guys! Amaury (talk | contribs) 20:21, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: I've gone ahead and reverted all of their edits, but feel free to look through my contributions and re-apply any you thought were you actually improvements, taking the responsibility yourself. Amaury (talk | contribs) 22:53, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

As I am sure you are now aware, 86.98.8.213 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) can be added to the list... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:06, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: It's been a little over a month now. How long can this possibly go on? LOL Amaury (talk | contribs) 06:11, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

IJBall, MPFitz1968, Callmemirela, I've made a significant update to my sub-page by going through the history of the articles in my sandbox and seeing which ones were attacked by Orchomen. Tomorrow I will be going through the history of articles on my watch list that are not in my sandbox as well as my contributions to see if there are any more to add. When you guys get a chance, I'd like you to please add any IPs that I did not list there from your reverts or discussions on AN/I or what have you. Michael, I know you had a list on Rob's talk page, though those may be ones I just added. Once the list is complete—or what we hopefully think is complete—I'll ping Rob and Katie. Thank you, everyone! Amaury (talk | contribs) 07:34, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Based on the pattern I've observed with sockers like Instantnood, the socker will eventually get tired of this, and will knock if off for a while. But after several months, they'll come back to it, and start it up all over again. (In fact, it looks like Orchomen has already followed this pattern, having started in Aug. and then knocked off until Oct.–now...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:00, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: Well, they need to knock it off completely, LOL! So based on the accounts Sro added to the list, do you finally remember who the master is? Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:42, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

It appears Orchos is the first account. Or, at least, the first one anyone knows about... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:46, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it goes way back than August. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 15:42, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

@BU Rob13:, @KrakatoaKatie: It looks like Orchomen has returned with an old IP 94.200.67.94 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 12:57, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Orchomen's back, using an old IP, at Barbarians Rising. I'm off to work soon, but I'd appreciate it if someone could get an Admin on this... Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:35, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I reported them above. I probably chose the wrong section to write that in. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 14:44, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

IJBall, Callmemirela: And they're blocked! Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:01, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I was about to say that lol! You stole my thunder ;P Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 15:02, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh look. Another one 36.255.205.8 (talk · contribs). Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 15:34, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: Is it possible that you revoke Orchomen's talk page access? I just got a notification that I was mentioned on their talk page and it turns out they're pinging Amaury, MPFitz, IJBall and I, and it's rather disruptive. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 14:32, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

KrakatoaKatie, it looks like when you re-blocked Orchomen as a sock, you removed the talk page edit and email restrictions that BU Rob13 had applied. Could we get that re-applied? :) They've just edited there. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Has he tried to contact your via email? I didn't get anything. However, I notice that he's taunting you and I by calling us his "puppets". Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 15:26, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

@Callmemirela: Not me, no. I don't know about others. However, when MPFitz1968 requested talk page access being revoked for Orchomen on Rob's talk page, Rob applied that and went ahead and applied email restrictions as well. Then those got, very likely accidentally, removed when Katie re-blocked Orchomen as a sock. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:01, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

It looks like somebody needs a hug – Talk page access needs to be removed from all Orchomen's registered accounts: see also User talk:Lochagos. (In case anyone needed any more evidence that Orchomen is a WP:NOTHERE case...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:13, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, now they're just spamming mentions, currently as Lochagos. All accounts in my list here really need to be hard-blocked. BU Rob13? Thanks in advance. :) Amaury (talk | contribs) 04:47, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Done I'd recommend archiving this section and just compiling information on the page that's been set up to list his accounts and IPs. Orchomen clearly has nothing better to do with their life than seek attention, and we shouldn't give them what they want. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:54, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: Coincidentally, tomorrow's my archiving day for November since tomorrow is a new month. :) I think I can speak for everyone here when I say we can't thank you enough for everything you and KrakatoaKatie have done. I'm sure this will keep going on for a while, but we can just silently report IPs to you guys and then deal with their damage after action has been taken. Amaury (talk | contribs) 05:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

List of fictional military ranks

Hello Amaury, I have not posted before today so I am not sure how to follow your guidelines. I apologize if this totally messes you up. You sent me a message saying you removed my edits from List of Fictional Military Ranks ([3]). I made changes because the original data was incorrect. For example, Commodore is not equal to a Rear Admiral of the Lower Half, nor is it the naval equivalent for a Brigadier (Army or Marine Corp). Commodore is strictly navy and the rank lies between Captain and Rear Admiral of the Lower Half. Please refer to [4] and [5] for Klingon ranks. I am also using the Klingon Dictionary (by Mark Okrand) as a reference. KosKari (talk) 00:22, 2 November 2016 (UTC)Kos'Kari

Girl Meets World: "Girl Meets Hollyworld"

Guess you beat me to updating the revised air date for that episode. :P I did see the request on the talk page, and indicated that the change was made there, though I thought I had made the change. Oh well. MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:07, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

New York City Department of Correction

I added two new cited sections "Facilities Overview" and "Specialty Unit" Here are the links to those sections. [6] [7] and you deleted them. Please explain. 24.185.13.203 (talk) 21:46, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Sexred

You just reverted an edit I made to Sexred as non-constructive. In this edit, I : 1) replaced redirected links with direct links ; 2) added reference to the third brother and co-king, attested by Bede and described in the Yorke reference provided (this required the relevant sentence to be split/rearranged, but no content was lost) ; 3) remove reference to Sigeberht the Little being son of his brother Saeward (Yorke argues that it was Sigeberht the Good, and not Sigeberht the Little, who was Saeward's son) ; 4) changed their death date based on Yorke; 5) removed hidden text that represented a prior version of the article, superseded in 2010, but for some reason the old text was hidden rather than being removed. I am not sure which of these change you found to be non-constructive. 50.37.108.37 (talk) 22:20, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Happy birthday from Callmemirela

Happy birthday!! 🎉 Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 22:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

@Callmemirela: Thank you. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:31, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

The Thundermans: "Up, Up, and Vacay!"

I've seen the first season (and the first few episodes of the second season) of The Thundermans. I watched the iTunes version, and the only ending I saw is them crawling to the finish (with Nora's bow making it to the finish line first and counting as a win) and going to the castles. nyuszika7h (talk) 22:38, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Alright, I checked the HDTV version online and the alternate ending is indeed there. I'll clarify it a bit in the article. nyuszika7h (talk) 22:43, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Also interesting, I don't know whether this is the case for other episodes as well, but here the end credits are overlayed on top of the episode during the alternate ending rather than being shown on a black screen with the instrumental theme music, as on iTunes. nyuszika7h (talk) 22:52, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

@Nyuszika7H: That's how Nickelodeon does things when showing things on TV. On their site, Amazon, or what have you, you'll see the intended credits. They play the credits during the episode rather than the actual original credits themselves. I don't know if it's to save on time or have more commercials, but either way, it's pretty stupid, if you ask. Many people, including myself, love watching the original credits. Amaury (talk | contribs) 22:59, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Orchomen

As an aside, please be sure to keep non-admin comments in the appropriate section at SPI. If you're the filer, they can go right under the report. If not, there's a dedicated section. Even if you're responding to something an admin said, it's helpful to place it in the appropriate section so CheckUsers/clerks can easily identify the admin comments. Thanks! ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 23:06, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: Roger! Yup! I was sitting there wondering, "Hm! Why'd he do that?" LOL And then I figured it out. I don't create SPIs that often, anyway, and I think this was the first time I was asked for more information, so I didn't know. However, now I do. Amaury (talk | contribs) 23:08, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

The Thundermans: "Give Me a Break-Up"

I know The Futon Critic is usually preferred over Zap2it, but Nick's own site is even higher priority IMO. nyuszika7h (talk) 21:34, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

@Nyuszika7H: Amazon, which gets their titles directly from the producers, I think is what Geraldo Perez said, also shows it with the "gimme." That's interesting, because I thought The Futon Critic got their titles directly from wherever. I have to catch my commuter bus in a little while, so I'll look over it more in depth when I get back. Amaury (talk | contribs) 22:14, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Zap2it and other programming guides get info from the networks but might not get changes in time to update. After a show has aired, they don't care anymore and don't generally update stuff after the fact. Futon Critic does make an attempt to be a record of what was broadcast and gets updated but usually has info later than the other sources. Network site should be correct but if it is a network press release again they have no incentive to correct advertising info. Amazon is selling something with a title and they get their info from the distributor so that should be correct for what they sell. Best is the copyright office but that is usually late. Also any of those can make mistakes in transcription, nothing is 100% accurate but in my opinion I'd trust Amazon and iTunes to get it right backed up with Futon Critic and current Network info. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:43, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Also, don't forget the WGA titles database (linked to at my user page) – WGA generally adds titles much faster than the U.S.C.O., and their version is nearly always the correct one (though I have found what are probably errors a couple of times even at WGA...). Anyway, WGA probably won't help you before an episode airs, but they can help you after episode airs. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC)