User talk:Drmargi/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Drmargi. 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.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Twinkle

Say, Drmargi, I've noticed that you've done quite a bit of reversions here on Wikipedia. However, as you should know, the "Undo" feature is pretty much the slowest method of reverting edits (well, other than opening up the revision you want to revert to, wait for the server to send you all the text on the page, and then hit Publish so you can send it all back). I would like to introduce you to Twinkle.

Twinkle is more than just an anti-vandalism tool - it is a set of Javascript functions that give autoconfirmed users many new abilities, such as being able to tag pages for deletion effortlessly, report users to the administrators, add the talkback template on user talk pages, warn users, and, of course, give autoconfirmed users the rollback links. Twinkle's rollback also allows you to add an edit summary, which is useful for good faith edits or if you're trying to explain why you reverted, if the edit wasn't vandalism.

Before you jump in, keep in mind that Twinkle does not work with Internet Explorer 8 or lower. If you're on XP, and thus can't get IE9, get Firefox or Chrome. Also, you might want to flip through the documentation to familiarize yourself with the new features.

Thank you, and happy editing. K6ka (talk | contrib) 20:15, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip! I do tend to do a lot of patrolling for vandalism and spurious or unsourced editing, and would love a tool like Twinkle. Unfortunately, it's only available for WIndows and I'm a hard-core Mac user. I tried out St-Tiki (sic) and didn't care for it (too much decontextualized decision-making), but sadly, Twinkle is not an option until they build a Mac version. --Drmargi (talk) 20:25, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

I know this line is corny but it is true as well

For me anyway :-) It feels more like four months than nearly four years since Matt GERONIMOED into our lives. I have to paraphrase David's 10th Dr line and say that "I don't want him to go" - I am looking forward to Peter though. Enjoy Wednesday's episode. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 05:54, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Edit to Top Gear page

Why do you keeping removing content from this page? This information is clearly available on the Applause Store website, and I'm trying to get it removed from the Wiki blacklist so I can reference it. 2.100.89.148 (talk) 19:54, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Because the site is on the blacklist, and can't be used, because you didn't reference correctly, and because you don't have a reliable source. Please stop re-adding it. --Drmargi (talk) 20:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Removal of License Agreement

Hello. You know the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License that has been attached to the Harold Finch (Person of Interest) article that I created. Well I have finally learned my lesson. I've been beginning to understand over the course of eight months knowing what it is like not to plagiarize other people's work; therefore, I am hereby deciding to remove it unless both you and I agreed. Maybe it'll be like good behavior or something. You and I also need to include a third party member just in case if there is a breach of contract. I assume that you're familiar with the rules of the contract. What do you say? Do we have an agreement? Batman194 (talk) 06:49, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

I'll tell you what, think about what I said over your Christmas break so that way you can make a decision to do or not to do it. It is entirely up to you. Have a merry Christmas and happy holidays. Batman194 (talk) 19:22, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

As always, reply to my talk page once you have made your final decision. Batman194 (talk) 00:39, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

If I were you, I would think about it very carefully. Batman194 (talk) 18:06, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Hey there. Hopefully you have a very good Christmas. Anyways, have you been thinking about your decision very carefully like I said? I sure hope so. I'm letting you know as a reminder that you have until January 4th to decide. As usual, I'll be waiting for your response on my talk page. Batman194 (talk) 00:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay. Time's up. What is your final decision? Batman194 (talk) 18:30, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sad News

I suspect you've already seen the news so I will just say that we lost a wonderful talent with the passing of Roger Lloyd-Pack. MarnetteD | Talk 17:07, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

NO! I didn't hear. What a loss! Thanks for letting me know. --Drmargi (talk) 17:25, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Sherlock

Obviously Season 3 has now finished and so should be included in the table. If you prefer to keep the current format, then could I ask you to update the table? PhilKnight (talk) 20:06, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

I was planning to once I got to my desktop computer. BTW, a more explanatory edit summary would have been helpful, especially given you chose to use a less informative table for no apparent reason rather than making the update yourself. --Drmargi (talk) 20:14, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that an edit summary with more explanation would have been preferable. FWIW, the only reason I copied the table is that I'm not especially good with tables. Anyway, thanks for agreeing to make the update. PhilKnight (talk) 22:16, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, that makes sense. I just didn't see why the change. I'll update once I'm not using my iPad. --Drmargi (talk) 00:07, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Robert Irvine

Hi Drmargi, I'm bringing this from my talk page in response to 74.70.107.142's post; let's have a centralised discussion.

From this post: Alright since you have a content dispute, the first thing I would advise you to do is assume good faith and please stop with those allegations, this was a quite serious attack.

And, most important of all, just relax. I doubt this is anything more than a dispute here, which started out by Drmargi and later, me, by removing your addition on basis of merely following the basic rule per WP:BLP; no one is affiliated to anyone here. Your reasoning that it's there in other pages, doesn't mean it should not be removed here as well as in those other areas if valid...Wikipedia is not finished.

There is ample time to solve this dispute, please do not make any more reverts till consensus on the talk page is reached. You both can start discussing again, this time please summarise your points focusing on the content only in the shortest way possible—for others to follow it more easily and judge, since I assume you want additional input from uninvolved users. I know nothing about this topic and came here purely by chance while patrolling. Drmargi, if this doesn't work out then maybe, some form of dispute resolution? Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:36, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

There already IS a centralized discussion on the article talk page. Any further discussion belongs there, where it is already taking place, after a fashion. Dividing it among several places is inappropriate, and the above is unclear since I can't tell who you are addressing. To encourage further discussion, involved editors need to stick to the topic at hand, the question of if/how a mention of the restaurant closing should be handled on the article talk page, not divided among it, my talk page and yours, and should observe the Wikipedia practice that we discuss the issue not the editor. So far, that and some major civility issues along with a lack of policy knowledge by the IP is impeding further progress, as should be readily apparent from his (now reverted) comments on my talk page, where he is no longer welcome.

Ugog Nizdast, I appreciate your efforts, but you are still a comparatively new editor here, and this is a tricky situation. Far better you direct the discussion back to its original site and help it to resume rather than creating a third, fractured discussion. It would also be far better if you were to encourage the IP to adopt a more civil and collaborative approach to the issue. Then, perhaps, we will find a way forward. For now, I have no interest in his long spates of verbiage laced with analysis of my editing, but precious little addressing the issue at hand. If and when he and you are prepared to discuss on the Robert Irvine talk page with an eye toward reaching consensus, I'm happy to rejoin the discussion. Until then, there is no consensus for the edit, neither he nor the other editor has provided a reliable source for the restaurant closure, and no one has attempted to discuss what it has to do with Irvine to the degree it passes BLP. --Drmargi (talk) 19:54, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Message

Hello. You have a new message at Anna Frodesiak's talk page. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hey, thanks for the barnstar!--Atlantictire (talk) 22:47, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Avec plaisir! You deserve it. --Drmargi (talk) 00:12, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Would appreciate your comments

There's a discussion underway at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television#Should inanimate objects be considered "main cast" in the infobox?. Unfortunately I've had to mention The Stig as a comparison so you might like to at least look at the discussion. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:20, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry; I dropped the ball on this one. I needed time to read it, then got so busy I forgot about it. I hope it went your way! --Drmargi (talk) 23:33, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

The outcome of the discussion is confusing as there are two related discussions with different outcomes. Regardless, it would still be great if you could have a look at the Stig stuff. On Stig related stuff, guess who I saw talking to James May and Jeremy Clarkson this weekend, sans helmet, at the Top Gear Festival in Sydney. --AussieLegend (✉) 11:26, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Will do. I'm guessing you saw Ben Collins. Am I warm? --Drmargi (talk) 15:28, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Sherlock502

Hello, Forgive me for the late reply. I've been busy in real life and have been unable to check my messages. Sorry I couldn't help with the editor, but the situation seems to have worked itself out-- so I may not need to get involved after all. Yes, Sherlock502 has a very aggressive editing style and there is a lot he has to learn. Hopefully, with time, he'll improve his behaviour. Let me know if you still need my help. Orane (talk) 02:27, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

No problem. He seems to have gotten the message, and that's what really matters. If he gets carried away again, I'll drop a note on your talk page. Thanks! --Drmargi (talk) 22:58, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

POI

Has a consensus been reached about which opening voiceover to use? Ollieinc (talk) 08:09, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

yes, some while back. S1 is more detailed. --Drmargi (talk) 08:12, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Could use your help

If you don't mind looking in, I'm having a problem with an editor who insists on splitting the List of Hannibal episodes into season articles despite the fact that A) The show's only had two seasons of 13 episodes and B) All of the information the editor is using to justify the split is just copied and pasted from the main series article anyway. I've started a discussion on the LoE talk page, but they haven't replied yet. Is there any way you could look in on it? Any help would be appreciated. -- SchrutedIt08 (talk) 06:14, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

I'll have a look. You might drop a note on AussieLegend's talk page, too. --Drmargi (talk) 06:17, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. -- SchrutedIt08 (talk) 10:31, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

CSI theme song

The source is the series itself. If you watch the first season, the theme song is clearly a completely different song. In the second season, Who Are You is the theme. I'm not sure why this would be a controversial or unconfirmable edit... Jeancey (talk) 17:09, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Except that on the DVD's, on Netflix and in reruns, S1 uses "Who Are You?" Consequently, all you have to go by is memory. That's why the controversy (some people remember it, some don't, some say it changed mid-season) and the need for a source. --Drmargi (talk) 19:35, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

You can still find the original episodes online. They use a different theme, so it isn't just memory. I literally JUST watched season 1 two days ago and it is a different theme. They changed it for the dvd release. The entire season uses the old theme. Since the DVD was released post-season 2 being created, so they used the new theme song. Jeancey (talk) 04:22, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

It's that time of year

Hello DM. I hope that you are well. Here is a link to pics of this years winners and other entries in the Peeps diorama contest. Enjoy. It looks like Decima may be too much for our POI heroes but Root is always there to make things interesting. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 20:36, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Weekend fun! I'm working every minute God gives, and am ready for a good laugh. Bless!! --Drmargi (talk) 05:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I think you will like pic 78 in particular. I just watched ep 8 of season 5 of Doc Martin. The little castle that Mrs Tishell takes baby James to is the same building that was use as the home for Dwight Enys in Poldark!! I got to see it back in 1980 and it is a cute place that can be rented out for a gorgeous Cornish vacation. Hang in there and I hope you get to recharge your batteries soon! MarnetteD | Talk 06:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I got one big job done today, and am about to treat myself to a wicked good cupcake from a local place as my reward. Seven weeks of instruction to go, and it's vacay time! Can't wait to see the Peeps!!! --Drmargi (talk) 06:11, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Many years ago I saw this at an animation festival. Considering the work that you are doing on-Wiki and off I thought you might enjoy it. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 17:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Classic! Reminds me of life OFF-wiki, too. Sigh... --Drmargi (talk) 17:51, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Twitter

Hi Doc. What is your opinion of using Tweets as sources? I know the 'pedia has to change with the times, but I, for one, think actual media should be used as sources. The reason(s) I ask is the recent credit changes on Castle references, the random Rizzoli additions, plus I found a tweeted image of the 301 episide script of Longmire with writer/director names. Thoughts? — Wylie pedia 17:52, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm OK with them IF they come from writers, producers, or other top-line crew AND IF the source is verified by Twitter. I don't trust cast, especially guest or recurring cast. So I'd believe a POI tweet from the writers' room or from Amanda Siegel's (a producer) twitter account, but not one from a the guy who plays Lambert (he tweeted recently about appearing in the finale.) Getting to your example, scripts change all the time (look at the upper left-hand corner for the list of versions), as does crew, and I'm not inclined to treat photographs as reliable. --Drmargi (talk) 18:18, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Regarding edit 604935173 from Person_of_Interest_(TV_series)

Plot point. Descriptions are applicable to any point in a character's timeline

If this is to be upheld, then shouldn't every character listed as deceased have the trait removed? Interference 541 (talk) 21:35, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes. I generally remove them, but I'm human and might have overlooked an addition. --Drmargi (talk) 21:39, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Sad news

Hello DM. I have only just seen the news about Bob Hoskins‎. I am deeply saddened by this but at least we had the joy of seeing so many of his wonderful performances. Best wishes to you. MarnetteD | Talk 16:28, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm heartbroken. He was a favorite, and I'd always hoped he'd be knighted. Sigh... --Drmargi (talk) 08:09, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Ian Ross, an Australian newsreader, died yesterday. He got nearly 8 minutes as the lead story on the news yesterday. Bob Hoskins‎ got nearly a minute tonight, almost as an afterthought. And yes, Ross got another two minutes, before Bob. --AussieLegend (✉) 08:42, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

I am pulling DVDs off my shelf so I can spend the weekend watching his performances. Mona Lisa and Roger Rabbit, of course. Most obits mention his role alongside Helen Mirren in The Long Good Friday but I didn't see any that noted that they appeared together again, 20 year later, in Last Orders (film). If only I could hop in a TARDIS and go back in time to 1980 and see them on stage in The Duchess of Malfi#Reception and performance history. If either of you tweet (I don't) about him would you please mention the wonderful series Flickers. A true gem, Hoskins acts opposite Frances de la Tour and their chemistry is exceptional. IMO it is easily as good as anything that Tracy and Hepburn did together. Condolences to his family and friends and to all of us. MarnetteD | Talk 15:38, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

There's a nice piece in the LA Times about him today, which he merits, and it's on the main page of CNN. I can understand the local news guy taking priority in reporting the two deaths, but what time difference. That's a shame. Great film recommendations, M! I also like him in The Secret Agent, with a collection of unusual character actors. Good, lesser known film, great performance. --Drmargi (talk) 16:56, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning both of these. I'm off to find out if the film is on DVD and to check out the LAT item. MarnetteD | Talk 18:09, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Wonderful tribute - especially her mention of the twinkle in his eyes. I forgot to mention his impish Iago opposite Hopkins Othello and I just got the bluray for Made in Dagenham a couple weeks ago. I have been very remiss in forgetting to mention Pennies from Heaven (TV series). MarnetteD | Talk 18:24, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

POI

Hello DM. Just a quick note to say I hope that you are excited for tonight's season ending POI. Fun to think that 2 years ago Root was scary to behold and now I am worried that she might not survive the evening. On another note have you seen this Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment#McGivers item that we were chatting about a few months ago? I tried finding an obit for John that listed his children and only found one the said he had ten (a bit like JS Bach) but did not give their names. Best regards. MarnetteD | Talk 21:17, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I'm so excited. I've been home "sick" (wounded really) today after a small accident, and that makes me all the more eager to have 10:00 get here. I'm staying away from anything/anywhere that could possibly spoil me, and determined to see the episode clean. I've saved last week's and this week's Blacklist to watch during the time between the east and west coast runs, just to be safe. I think I saw that obit you're referring to; I couldn't find the names either. Speaking of which, George? Hmmm... --Drmargi (talk) 21:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

So sorry to hear about your wound. Speaking of a different George this Friday PBS's American Masters series has an episode about George Plimpton. Natch, I read all of his sports books as a teenager but my appreciation grew as I discovered his varied writings. He was also interesting in the interviews I saw over the years. As soon as I am done typing I will be crossing my fingers that you heal quickly!!! MarnetteD | Talk 22:30, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I tripped over a cord and took a rather hard fall, so I'm all banged up. Doctor has me home for a bit of rest, but I can go back to work tomorrow. I'll have to see that American Masters. I remember loving "Paper Lion." --Drmargi (talk) 22:33, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

I am so sorry that happened. I think that it is like Medusa's "hair" those cords try to curl around our feet and make life more difficult. As to what I just witnessed on POI I have to quote Matt's Dr and say Yowza that was amazing. As with Matt's regeneration it was unlike anything that came before. I knew the answer to Root's line about what was at the bottom of Pandora's Box. It has been a wonderful exclamation in so many places - "Beyond all hope Gandalf" is one - another is track 8 of this Hope (Klaatu album). If you can track it down on the net you might enjoy it - or at least you will have one of the artistic creations that keep me going. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 04:25, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Well, that was a stunner. Best finale yet, I'd say. Where did this season go? Root is the last person you'd expect to be talking about hope. So ironic. SO we scatter (someone on that writers' team watches Leverage) and reform again. Whew! --Drmargi (talk) 07:04, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Person of Interest

You deleted my sourced addition without comment. Explain, please. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:53, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

There was an explanatory hidden note. Moreover, your source says returning in 2014, not 2014-2015. And, it's customary to give an editor more than half an hour to respond to a request on their talk page before reverting, particularly when you leave a message early in the morning. --Drmargi (talk) 15:40, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm waiting for you to say now that we can't have an article 2016 Summer Olympics because it's not 2016 yet. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:54, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Do you have anything constructive to add? Otherwise, I'll close this discussion. --Drmargi (talk) 17:14, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

You still haven't explained why you don't think there will be a 2014-15 season. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:28, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

You can give your explanation where I've reported you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Question

Hello DM. If you have a moment I was wondering if you could answer the question posed here Talk:List of Inspector Morse episodes#Series logo.3F. I don't remember ever seeing this being used with US showings of the TV series - unless it was right at the beginning in the 80's. I have a vague memory that it might have been used as cover art for the books (or DVDs?) at some point but I could be wrong there too. If you are busy please don't worry about it. I hope that you have a nice week as the school year winds down. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 21:12, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Done! My immediate thought was book art, too. I've never seen it on a DVD in the U.S. or the U.K. I am SO ready for school to be over. --Drmargi (talk) 21:18, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts. I am such a maroon for not getting out of my chair and checking my DVDs. I have removed it from both articles since we should only be using the UK title card. Enjoy the rest of your evening. MarnetteD | Talk 22:16, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Am I becoming too mellow?

Even the vandals are amusing me. First there was the one who chose to continue his edit-war with an admin who then blocked him, then something else happened (Alzheimer's might be a factor) and now we have a fan who has already been picked for a role but has to first read some acting books before she goes to acting class. I'm just finding things that used to annoy me incredibly funny. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:11, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I know. This one was particularly amusing. You're pissing her off because she has all that to do -- so what's she doing fooling around on Wikipedia? (Said as I grade papers with the same errors I've corrected all term.) You've had more than your share of late. Mercy! --Drmargi (talk) 19:21, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

List of Top Gear episodes

Your comments at Talk:List of Top Gear episodes#Series overview table would be appreciated. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:05, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Done. When you get a minute, would you look at the discussion at Talk:Elementary (TV series)#Spoiler, and the "Reopen" subsection in particular? I think they're hiding behind policy to remove what they perceive as a spoiler (from a year-old episode). I'm just not sure it's the hill I want to die on. What do you think? --Drmargi (talk) 17:56, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't watch the series so I'm not sure of the significance of the information and that's where the issue lies, because the discussion is about the lead. It's mentioned in the "Recurring" characters section that Natalie Dormer is Irene Adler/Jamie Moriarty. Is it possible to reword it in such a way that you can justify keeping the content in the lead? Is Irene Adler's role that of Sherlock's nemesis? If so then "Jamie Moriarty/Irene Adler" might be appropriate. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:44, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I think it's significant. She was responsible for his addition, and still drives a lot of what he does. They are reacting to a spoiler that isn't a spoiler, which really troubles me. I appreciate the objective view. I needed a section POV to get my thinking clear. --Drmargi (talk) 19:58, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

CSI Series

It seems you doubt the new series. In terms of TV shows, anything is possible. Perhaps I can help resolve the issue of CSI extending to another city. 20:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.236.101.166 (talk)

Doubt? It's a fake, period. --Drmargi (talk) 21:37, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Also in the works

CSI:Santa Barbara, CSI: Ames and, the one I am looking forward to the most CSI: Cicely, Alaska. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 21:13, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Oh, honestly, how stupid do these idiots thing people are? Sigh... But Cicely does have some potential. --Drmargi (talk) 21:35, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Aaaand now he's recreated the article. --Drmargi (talk) 21:44, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Everything on TV was a made up idea, so what gives? CSIFan782014 (talk) 22:44, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

So sorry that you are being trolled by this buffoon. New scents of Troll-be-Gone are available for shipment by drone. MarnetteD|Talk 22:56, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

The show doesn't exist, and playing silly buggers won't change that. Your latest attempt to recreate the hoax article has now been recommended for deletion, and I suspect a block can't be far behind. --Drmargi (talk) 00:25, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Marnette, thanks for the back-up. I'm good for Troll-Be Gone; I just bought the new industrial strength cinnamon scent recently. --Drmargi (talk) 00:25, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

seriously, you should consider AGF and IAR when you deal with new users. We could discuss this peacefully or we can throw insults at eachother. If the subject is really a hoax then I'll keep it on my page space until the show can be proven.

Also, I'm not the stubborn "troll" you think I am. A troll is a creature that annoys people under a bridge, which I am not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CSIFan782014 (talk • contribs) 00:06, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Seriously, you are displaying all of the characteristics of a Troll (Internet) so naming you as such certainly applies. AGF goes out when editing patterns as yours come in. BTW, you might want to learn how to sign your posts. MarnetteD|Talk 00:14, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

CSIFan, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck. AGF is not endlessly elastic, and can be lost. IAR doesn't apply to new users, and it certainly doesn't apply to silly, bored users trying to create a hoax article. The show doesn't exist, and is unlikely ever to exist. Stop. --Drmargi (talk) 00:25, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm not a duck, either. I'm a person with a sense of humor. I had no idea you'd get offended and take it being harmful. I still hold to the point that the first three series were thought up by someone and they're very popular. Therefore, it's not out of the realm of possibility a 4th series will be created. CSIFan782014 (talk) 01:21, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

And that's fine. Take it to a fan site. Around here, that "article" on a non-existent show is a. vandalism; b. disruptive, and when it's repeatedly created; c. trolling. Find a fan site and have fun there. No one is offended, just bored with your childish behavior, and not interested in providing a place for you to play. Your behavior is inappropriate and unwelcome here. Move on. --Drmargi (talk) 02:08, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

You have to realize that all fiction articles like the other three CSI shows were though up by someone with an imagination like me, so I dare ask for your benefit of the doubt. CSIFan782014 (talk) 20:56, 9 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.174.113.12 (talk)

We don't trade in fiction. We trade in verifiable facts. You need to acquaint yourself with that policy. As I noted earlier, AGF is not infinitely elastic, nor is it license to do whatever you want. Your are creating an article about a show that doesn't and likely will never exist. That doesn't fall within policy and practice here, period. Benefit of the doubt simply doesn't enter into it. --Drmargi (talk) 21:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited State of Play (TV serial), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tom Burke. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Debuted is not a verb

Apparently, yes it is. No worries though. Premiered works just as well. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:03, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Please forgive me...

Dear Mr. Drmargi,

Listen, I just want to sadly apologize for using disruptive editing during this time, but I'm really new to this, and I don't know any yet about this, and but anyway I'm sorry for everything, and I'll hope you forgive me.

IceColdKillerz103 (talk) 08:50, 19 July 2014 (UTC) 7/19/2014

We're cool. You did the smart thing, and stopped. You need to calm down a bit, and let reverts tell you that you've made an error. If you need help, ask! We don't bite as a rule. You'll save yourself a lot of hassle and avoid the kind of warnings I had to put on your talk page earlier. BTW, I'm not a Mr. --Drmargi (talk) 08:52, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

AN/I

Hello DM. Just wanted to let you know about this Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Want to report User: Drmargi. Sorry to be the one to mess up your Sunday with this but it looks like a few editors are already on this IPs nonsense. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 17:42, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, MD. I know about it. This is an IP sock of Roman888; he goes after me every so often. --Drmargi (talk) 17:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Wasn't sure on that one myself and didn't have time to research it today so I gave my AGF response. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 17:59, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

I saw that. The less attention we give him, the better. This routine is classic, although I must say the rapid dash to ANI is a new flourish. He'll get bored in a day or two and go away for another six months or so. --Drmargi (talk) 18:02, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Non-denial denial

...is actually a term used frequently in All the President's Men. It means attacking the complainant without actually denying anything directly. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:27, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I know. Woodstein coined it in their reporting of Watergate. That's why it was such a hoot in this context. Although I'm not sure either of them imagined it applied to a Malaysian drama queen socking from Australia. --Drmargi (talk) 18:33, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

From the truly earth-shaking to the relatively trivial, it works. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:43, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

So true. You can't beat the classics. He's still at it at ANI. I think he gets likkered up every so often, then goes on a tear; he's always most active in the middle of the night, OZ time. --Drmargi (talk) 18:49, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

San Jose State Naming and Space Grant Status

You need to clearly define your reasoning with links to facts before making edits to pages. I may be new, but this does not excuse ignoring facts just because you see fit.

Just because those universities aren't funded in the same way land-grant IHE are, it doesn't mean that this kind of designation is solely responsible for the definition of the "type" of universities in the world; this is extremely arbitrary rhetoric. It's an appeal to authority, and wasn't even my edit to begin with.

NASA/The Federal Government of the United States funds/supports these universities for studies in aerospace science and engineering. This is not debatable because it's factual. Therefore, we can objectively state that such universities can be classified as being "space-granted." It would be ludicrous to say they can't be categorized by type as such. Kaigenji (talk) 08:34, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

You completely lack any understanding of what a land-grant institution is and what a campus consortium such as Space Grant is; your statement above makes that clear. They're not equivalent; even the article says that. Most CSU and UC campuses have multiple federal grants that support specific projects or programs of research; the Space Grant project is far from unique in that respect. A land grant is utterly different, provides for creation of an IHE, and carries with it specific criteria for what an institution can and cannot be. You need to read, carefully, learn the difference, and stop trying to list Space Grant as a type of institution. Instead, write a section in the narrative that mentions SJSU's involvement in the project and leave it there. --Drmargi (talk) 08:53, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Kitchen Nightmares

Just an FYI, I expect the IP will continue to add viewer figures (good on him!) so I've adjusted all the column widths so that when he does, it's simply a matter of changing the table width from 90% to 100% to make sure the columns still all line up. In the meantime, seasons that have viewer figures are wider than the rest because they have one extra column. Even so, the columns all line up. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:28, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

As long as he does them properly, and without all the drama, I have no ax to grind. Leave him in peace, and thanks for the fixes. That said, the minute he starts on updates, all bets are off. I did some rounding, since we usually round to the hundredth place. --Drmargi (talk) 19:25, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Been in similar positions myself..nice job. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:48, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Here here! Well deserved to be sure. MarnetteD|Talk 15:56, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Fun Dr Who DVD news

You may have already seen it but I thought I would let you know about this. I somehow missed "The Five(ish) Doctors" completely. In talking with Gareth I discovered that we saw an edited version of "The Science of Doctor Who" so it will be nice to have the full version. Lots of other good looking extras as well now the only dilemma is "Will it be release in the US?" Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 15:56, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

it did? That surprises me! Isn't it fun? The best part is an appearance representing the actors who have passed on (thus the fiveish). You'll see what I mean. Really clever! --Drmargi (talk) 16:46, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Well I'm torn - I don't know whether to rush off and see it online or wait for the DVD so I can see it in all its glory on my TV. Decisions Decisions :-) MarnetteD|Talk 17:02, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, I found a happy medium, loaded the torrent into my dropbox and streamed to the TV over Chromecast. Man, that was the best $35 I ever spent. I have it on the bedroom TV. Very handy for such things. The show is really cute, and would be worth the wait, if that helps. --Drmargi (talk) 17:12, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Legends

Most anything disambiguated with that much similarity, I undo. Legend (disambiguation) or Legends both point to the 2014 series. I usually only dab hat similar titles or previous/international-like titles, unless there are kaboodles of them. Someone just loves to dab hat. — Wylie pedia 03:48, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

SJSU

Hello there. I notice you keep adding the "land grand" designation under "Type" in the San Jose State University infobox. SJSU in NOT a land-grant university. I have worked in higher education at a land-grant university for nearly 15 years and am very familiar with what this designation means. SJSU was founded as a normal school in the 1850's to train teachers. Again, not a land-grant. If you are unclear as to what a land grand university is, please Google "Morrill Act" and go from there. You seem to be under the impression that all public universities are land-grant institutions, which is patently false. Also, I do understand the differences between a land-grant and the various research grant designations. I don't think anyone is conflating these very different designations by adding the "space-grant" identifier to the SJSU infobox. Many university Wiki articles list these various research designations under "Type" along with the land-grant designation if applicable. As far as I can tell, there is nothing under Template:Infobox university to suggest this is inappropriate. Londonfifo (talk) 22:44, 30 July 2014 (UTC)Londonfifo

As higher education faculty, I'm well acquainted with land-grant v. space/sea/sun-grant, too, and have said nothing to suggest all public universities are land-grant; please endeavor not to put words in my mouth or make gross assumptions based on scant evidence. Some while back, someone removed land-grant and replaced it with space grant in the SJSU article. I didn't double-check to be sure SJSU was a land-grant institution because that designation had been in place for some time prior to the change to space grant, just removed the erroneous substitution, restored land-grant and let it go. Another editor alerted me that SJSU wasn't land-grant a few days ago, at which time I stopped making the edit That said, the use of sun/space/sea grants are not equivalent to land-grants. They are federal grant programs that support specific activities in the sciences (space grant being aerospace), not types of institutions in the way a land-grant is. A land-grant institution, such as Cal State LA is a specific type of institution, not a participant in a grant program, such as CSULA, UCLA, SJSU and UCB are in space grant. If you work in higher education, you know there are all manner of such programs across a range of disciplines, and there is nothing about these grant programs in particular that merit special mention. Individual campuses participation can be noted in narrative, but it does not belong in the infobox. --Drmargi (talk) 01:13, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

I assumed good faith edits on your part when you inserted the incorrect land-grant designation more than once. It's just that you rather condescendingly advised me to brush up on SJSU history when in reality you were the one who was sorely unfamiliar with SJSU's beginnings as a normal school. As you may have noticed, I am one of the principle custodians of the SJSU article spanning many years, so hopefully it's clear to most I know a thing or two about SJSU.

Also, I disagree including the space-grant designation in the infobox is inappropriate or somehow elitist. The congressional acts that led to the formation of the sea, sun, space and urban-grant research designations were modeled after the Morrill Acts of the 1800s and have been used to develop academic consortia that link institutions with similar research profiles... just as the original land-grant acts were meant to help cultivate the study of agriculture and mechanical arts at colleges and universities across the U.S. These broad designations are not in the same category as research funding for individual projects in specific disciplines. Also, a space-grant designation, for example, does not imply a lack of intensive research in fields unrelated to aerospace.

Having said all of that, if you feel strongly this high-profile and unique federal designation should not be included in the infobox, I'm fine with that, but we should work to find a logical place for its inclusion within the body of the article. Also, it's worth noting that MANY university Wiki articles include these federal research designations (sea, sun, space and urban) in their respective infoboxes, so perhaps there needs to be an adjustment to the Wiki template that mentions specifically whether these designations are appropriate for inclusion there.

What I do find elitist is the insertion of the "flagship" designation in the infobox, since flagship status is often debatable and also implies superiority by default within a given state university system. The Cal Berkeley and UCLA articles are good examples of this. Both claim flagship status and include this designation in the infobox. This is inappropriate and smacks of boosterism.

Finally, unless I misread your comments, you seem to imply CSULA is a land-grant institution, which is not true. (My apologies if I misread your comment.) The University of California is the only land-grant institution in California. D-Q university (now defunct) also held land-grant status, but this designation came more than 100 years after passage of the first Morrill Act by way of a federal cash grant in place of a land grant. Londonfifo (talk) 20:57, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Legends (TV series) hatnote...

...is back. Feel free to weigh in here. — Wylie pedia 03:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, could that have been any more appropriate? That editor is notorious for aggressive editing and edit warring, so this may be a long struggle. But to hijack the discussion and take it to the TV page the day the show premiered was way out of line, as was his revert. I've restored status quo, weighed in on the show talk page and requested the discussion on the project page be closed to allow the other one time to develop. --Drmargi (talk) 06:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I also like their "I am probably one of the more proficient Wikipedia users in the world" comment. Oh, okay, free pass then! — Wylie pedia 07:43, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Merger proposal

As a discussant at Talk:Legends_(TV_series)#The hatnote, I am calling your attention to Talk:Legend_(disambiguation)#Merger_proposal.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:22, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Please accept my apology...

Dear Ms. Drmargi, well I guess I sadly apologize this about my editing about the director's names. Will you please forgive me again?

IceColdKillerz103 (talk) 06:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Don't worry, I already reverted all ER TV season articles on the director's name: "Felix Alcala".

Dear Ms. Drmargi, I already reverted all the ER season articles on the director's name: "Félix Alcalá" to "Félix Enríquez Alcalá, and don't you worry about it anymore, and like I said I really sorry about what I did about my editing, I mean... I should be ashamed to myself, it will never happen again. Thanks! Please forgive me...

IceColdKillerz103 (talk) 07:23, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

You don't need forgiveness! You made a mistake, and to your credit, you fixed it. Good for you! --Drmargi (talk) 08:05, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

It is almost here!

Did you see the documentary about the world tour that Peter and Jenna went on? It had several sequences showing just how creative the fans are. I enjoyed the "Time Warp" with the 10th Dr, Martha and others. The kids who form an orchestra via the web was also special. If you take these lyrics and substitute in the line "A new Doctor tonight" I think you get something that works pretty well as a theme song each time we get a regeneration episode. I started hearing it in my head when Chris turned into David. BTW Jon Pertwee was in the London cast of the play that this song is from in 1963 and he also had a small role in the film!! Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 02:55, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

OMG, I just sat down to write to you about it. It was SO much fun! How lovely that they recognized some of the fan creatives; have you seen those two promo videos they referred to? The "Rain" one is amazing. I've got to find the full-length version of "Time Warp" if it's around. And it's Peter Capaldi just a kid in a candy store right now??? You're totally right about "Comedy Tonight". Going to be early so I can be ready for the viewing tomorrow. What a day!! --Drmargi (talk) 05:19, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes the videos are wonderful. As I woke up this morning I started wondering if anyone else as had the same idea about "CT" - it would seem ripe for a video tribute by at least one of those creative fans out there. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 12:11, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

I suspect you have already seen it but I leave this just in case. MarnetteD|Talk 01:52, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I have, although just once. They featured his "Rain" video in the special, of course. Very talented! --Drmargi (talk) 02:03, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I can't tell if "Wholock" is part of an ongoing series or not. As you may have guessed I stumbled on it when I was tracking down the "Rain" video. My favorite vid involving rain is this one. Here is an old school mashup I always wanted to see. Anthony Valentine was so wonderful in Raffles that I wanted that character to meet Jeremy Brett's Sherlock. They were both so mercurial and it would have been a great battle of wits. Now both actors were in "The Illustrious Client" back in 91 but there was only one scene with them together. It is towards the end of the story and I noticed that the camera angles were such that we never saw them in the frame at the same time - with once exception - after the vial of vitriol (I love that phrasing) has been thrown in Baron Gruner's (AV) face he runs past Holmes but his face is covered and it looks like a body double. It has always looked odd to me and I wonder if there is some background story (from busy work schedules to animosity or anything in between) about this. Oh, do you think we can convince Moffat that Raffles should make an appearance in his Sherlock series? After all E. W. Hornung who wrote Raffles was Arthur Conan Doyle's brother-in-law. The other cross over episode that I always wanted was for the crew of Red Dwarf to meet the employees of Planet Express. Though I am feeling a bit better I am going to retire early. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 03:15, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. You have been mentioned in a report I have made about the actions of User:Editor157 at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Editor157 reported by User:AussieLegend (Result: ). --AussieLegend (✉) 16:41, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Who knows what is harmful?

You wrote on Jimbo Wales' page that "No abstract principle should ever take priority over a human life." But how do you decide when a human life is at stake? When half the world's media is writing about a person, does it matter if Wikipedia doesn't? Does it matter what all the media do when we know full well that, like clockwork, every two weeks ISIS is going to churn out another dead hostage?

But more importantly, do you ever try to calculate the cost in human life of the information that we don't publish? If we don't have an article on the latest hostage waiting to be executed, how many people who work in the Middle East will fail to see details of how that person was targeted and captured? How many people will fail to recognize that ISIS is a problem that needs solving? How many Iraqis, even how many other hostages, will die because we decided it was wrong to look and think about the world when it happened?

The criticism in the David S. Rohde case was dead right: Wikipedia has greatly exaggerated the benefit of censorship, beyond what is plausible, while sacrificing its reputation to do so. When people allow themselves to believe that God-like external authorities can predict what effect their pursuit of knowledge will have on the future, and surrender their freedom of speech and inquiry, this is what we get. A world where a journalist is merely the lowest-paid, lowest-ranking kind of intelligence agent. And indeed, I do wonder if that is what the British are really hiding. Wnt (talk) 21:12, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

FYI

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Yet another article split....

Umm, no, not really, and this is amazing. With all the problems we've seen with premature article splits, I'm surprised as NCIS already has multiple season articles and yet, even though season 12 has started, nobody seems interested splitting it to its own article. Should I call Ripleys? --AussieLegend (✉) 15:08, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I thought I felt the earth move. Definitely -- call Ripley's before the "split for splitting's sake" brigade discovers what they missed. Girding myself to protect POI and Castle for another season. --Drmargi (talk) 23:19, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Your reversion of my edit to "Longmire"

Greetings and felicitations. I noticed that you reverted my edit to the Longmire article. To answer your question ("Why link a fictional county to a real Indian tribe?"), I linked "Absaroka" (not, note, "Absaroka County") to Crow Nation because "Absaroka" is one version of the word for the self-designation of the Crow Nation—it's what they call themselves.—DocWatson42 (talk) 04:45, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

OH! Absent a edit summary that 'splained that, I couldn't figure what you were doing. Mea culpa and feel free to revert. --Drmargi (talk) 05:26, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about that, and thank you (done). I had thought that the presence of the word in the Crow Nation article's lead paragraph was self evident proof of relevancy, so I didn't bother to explain. ^_^;; —DocWatson42 (talk) 07:58, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

And I could have paid a touch closer attention. Regardless, problem solved! --Drmargi (talk) 23:20, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Another 'I missed this"

Hello DM. I just found out that PBS will be airing the new season of Lewis next Sunday. I missed that they had even continued the series after the way that last season seemed to wrap up their storylines. Even more amazing - from this info List of Lewis episodes#Series 8: 2014 it looks like we will be seeing the episodes "before" they air in the UK. Ah well, more new things to look forward to. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 21:37, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Top Gear IPs

Based on your edits on their talk pages, I assume that you also believe 109.69.82.82 and 86.184.19.195 are the same editor. 109.69.82.82 has been adding huge amounts of text (about 1,100 words) to an episode summary at Top Gear (series 21) and 86.184.19.195 has restored it. I haven't communicated with 86.184.19.195 but 109.69.82.82 is unresponsive and simply keeps restoring the content, despite requests and warnings on his talk page. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:55, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I think they are, yes. They geolocate to the same place, more or less, if I remember correctly, and neither are communicative, although they have taken some of the reminders I've given them on board. Oddly enough, I'd noticed the issue with Top Gear, but aside from issues with British v. American English and a penchant for arbitrary capitalization, the IPs have done a serviceable job on the US article. Go figure. --Drmargi (talk) 02:06, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Apologies

I sincerely apologize if I have somehow inadvertently upset you. That is not my intent: my intent is to improve articles I am editing. I honestly don't know why you seem so offended by me. I ping you and others to bring people into the discussion who have expressed interest in it. To get a consensus, one must have multiple opinions. My comments are directed to the discussion board and I am letting you know about them. As for pointing out policy, you are the one referring to policies (and mistating them) in the comments and I was just clarifying them. This is a comment towards you: I think you need to try and revert less and compromise more to try and gain consensus instead of trying to use "status quo" to stop editors from making changes. If you want to bring an admin in, I have no problem with that, I have done nothing wrong.AbramTerger (talk) 21:41, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Superhero is a genre

You keep telling me that superhero is not a genre. If this is correct, then why does Wikipedia have a page dedicated to superhero that describes it as a genre. Also, TV shows like Arrow list it as one of their genres. You can verify all of this by clicking on the links in this message.—Saagar A (talk) 18:08, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

You seriously need to get a clue. Read the article you're linking to and see how badly misapplied superhero fiction (not superhero, which is an adjective, not a genre) is to this show. You wider from the mark with superhero fiction than you were with cyberpunk. You need to quit while you're ahead, learn the guidelines for reliable sources (one of the few the community still takes seriously), stop trying to use an editorial piece as a reliable source and learn what those genres you are so badly misapplying actually are. --Drmargi (talk) 19:24, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

The following pages list the page superhero fiction in their genre category as just superhero:

I agree with you that it should be superhero fiction. I will fix that. I doubt that we need sources for genre because we do not need sources. Why are you so aggressive? Calm down. This is supposed to be a collaborative effort. Debate and discussion is the best way to produce accurate articles. I still do not see how it is not superhero fiction. The show is about a group of individuals using science fiction technology to give them the ability to predict and prevent crimes. Superheroes are vigilantes. Those would be the superpowers as in comics abilities are often derived from technology how is this any different. The Machine is their superpower although it might not seem like one. This is completely consistent with superhero fiction. Either way superhero do not need superpowers as stated in the article.

There is a "rogues gallery" of recurring villains such as HR, Decima, Vigilance, Control, and The Brotherhood. All of which have supervillain names. The article says, "even without actual physical, mystical, superhuman or superalien powers, the supervillain often possesses a genius intellect that allows him to draft complex schemes or create fantastic devices." An example of this is Mr. Greer of Decima in season 2 with the computer virus, and Greer in season 3 with Samaritan. Mr. Greer's plot of creating Vigilance to remove Harold's Machine from power is an example of this trope. An example of the complex schemes would be Elias with his plan to take out the Russian mob and unite the five families. He even went through the trouble of Samaritan itself is an example of such a supervillain. Rogue AI is a common trope in superhero fiction. Another trope, mentioned in the article you think I have not read.

The police has a name for Reese like the Man in the Suit, which is similar to a superhero identity. There are police officers who work with the vigilante similar to Detective Gordon from Batman. In season 4, each team member adopt a secret identity. These civilian alter egos are common tropes in superhero fiction that is also mentioned in the page about superhero fiction. In a comic con panel, one of the creators even referred to it as a superhero show.

The crime drama and science fiction aspects are emergent properties of this being a show about superheros. Did you even read the Wikipedia page on superhero fiction?

If you want to disagree that is fair, just give proper reasoning instead of saying that it is wrong like I did. Also, people have been annoyed with your reverting of changes without discussion in the past.―Saagar A (talk) 20:13, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Although it cannot be used as a source, the following article provides more justification. http://io9.com/5868591/why-person-of-interest-is-a-superhero-show-done-right-Saagar A (talk) 20:22, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

What is eluding you is that POI may take inspiration from superhero fiction, particularly Batman, but that doesn't make it a superhero show. It doesn't meet the description (Arrow and The Cape are singularly unconvincing comparisons). It doesn't fit the superhero fiction genre; read the article carefully, and that's clear as glass. You'd do far better to put your efforts into adding a section to the article narrative, well sourced, that describes how Jonathan Nolan and the writers take inspiration from the genre in the development of the plot. But it's not superhero fiction in and of itself. --Drmargi (talk) 20:42, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

What other kind of source am I supposed to get for a TV show besides promotional materials? The interview I used was on IGN. If a prominent member of the show, says something about the show it is not accurate because it is a promotional interview. Where else could one get information on a TV show? Its not like it is nonfiction. I SHOULD NOT NEED ANY SOURCES FOR GENRE. How is this not a superhero show? Please explain what qualifies as the genre of the show per Wikipedia guidelines.-Saagar A (talk) 20:56, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Please discuss on POI and not revert everything

Please discuss the various open discussions at Talk:Person_of_Interest_(TV_series). I have been trying very patiently to be collaborative, but you don't offer any compromises, instead choosing to revert the various compromises I offer without trying to convince me of the appropriateness of the logic. You have not even tried to explain the logic of the ordering. Every character seems to be placed with different reasoning. There seems to me to be no consistency within the article.AbramTerger (talk) 15:41, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Due to your constant reverting with a seeming reluctance to discuss or explain anything, I have made a request for dispute resolution at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Person_of_Interest_(TV_series).AbramTerger (talk) 11:57, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Drmargi, please stop reverting and join the talk page for discussion and consensus. If the talk page yields no consensus then ask for a third opinion or a WP:RfC or other forms of dispute resolution. It is not appropriate to make a single comment on the talk page citing WP:IAR and quoting Jimbo only to walk away and continue reverting changes. Neither quotes from Jimbo nor a superfluous citing of 'ignore all rules' is a justification for abandoning the fundamental processes of WP. Please join the discussion on the talk page. Thank you.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 13:00, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Please discuss at Talk:Person_of_Interest_(TV_series)#Revamped_Recurring_characters changes you want to make and why you don't want to follow Guidelines for TV Series articles.AbramTerger (talk) 17:49, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Just to let you know, since you haven't wanted to discuss even at the dispute resolution page, I have created a Wikipedia:Requests for comment to get feedback from others to help resolve the issues.AbramTerger (talk) 01:55, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

CSI: Crime Scene Investigation air date episode update.

Hello, Drmargi? I've noticed you reverted my edit about the CSI: Crime Scene Investigation air date episode update, but you don't understand, I was trying to help and update the episode number that was aired yesterday on 9:00 PM Mountain Time that equaled to a total of 322 episodes as of October 26, 2014. And, anyway, I know this looks weird, but I'm not making this up or lying to you. Please contact me right away on my talk page when you get this message as soon as possible, thanks!

UnSub-Zero (talk) 11:01, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

The scheduled new episode last night was pre-empted when football ran long. If you got an episode, it was a rerun of the 300th episode, and already in the count. --Drmargi (talk) 13:23, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi DM. I don't think it was because of the football. The Sunday night games are on NBC and, since CSI moved to Sunday's, each of the games has still been going when a CSI episode starts. I think last nights rerun was caused by the reduction of CSI episodes as mention in numerous reports last week including this one. Now this is WP:OR on my part and your revert was still correct. I just wanted to add this in case there was any other pushback on your edit. Cheers and have a spooktacular week. MarnetteD|Talk 15:29, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

CBS apparently tweeted it was the NFL game running long. http://cartermatt.com/138046/csi-season-15-episode-5-preempted-due-nfl-new-episode-tonight/. I think the reduction came earlier, when the decided to put CSI Cyber behind it, but would need to double check that. --Drmargi (talk) 15:38, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. Sounds good but I may have read too much Orwell recently cause my double speak antenna is tingling :-) I know you weren't watching the show back then but the "official" reasons the BBC gave for Colin Baker's leaving the role of the Doctor had nothing to do with the "behind the scenes" reasons. A world without (well except for never ending reruns) CSI or Law and Order is kinda weird - I guess NCIS is in charge now. HeeHee. Look for a Jacquie Lawson treat later in the week! MarnetteD|Talk 15:49, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Jeepers. I forgot that SVU is still going. But by seasons end it may be the last one. Except for the upcoming CSI: Chicago. :-D MarnetteD|Talk 17:24, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, let's not forget CSI: Chicago. That was a pretty funny episode. Yeah, L&O: Rape is still going strong, more's the pity. --Drmargi (talk) 17:28, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Very apt title! The fact that the show has become exactly that is why I stopped watching and if I'm not watching it must not be on. No ego problems here. HeeHee. MarnetteD|Talk 17:49, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Silliest internet argument on a rather silly topic

Hey there, could you pop back over on the List of Castle episodes talk page, as AussieLegend now has it in his/her head that I'm a lone crusader, not just someone who is turning articles into actual English. Thanks! JesseRafe (talk) 12:16, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Ahem! Should I point to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Personal attacks, 3RR edit-warring and article ownership by user Tharthan, where a silly argument about whether or not to use "whilst" was resolved very eaasily?[1] That was a silly argument. Discussing an editor's preference to edit-war, arbitrarily changing an established practice instead of discussing, is NOT silly. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:26, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Ahem, yes, please point to an insistence in which I did not edit-war or 3RR as I did not edit-war this time either. Also, that was not as silly a question nor was the article on yo silly as it was contently substantive, not a curated list. Why even bring that up, other than to give my arguments more credence? That was another example of my edits reflecting near-universal style guides, e.g. "Don't use whilst". Wow, it sounds like I know what style guides say, doesn't it? JesseRafe (talk) 14:06, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

In both this instance and at Yo, you edit-warred. But let's not clutter up Drmargi's talk page any more. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:16, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

OK, boys, let's play nice. Let me read through all the discussion now I have time and the patience (and enough sleep) to do so, and we'll see if we can find a compromise. After all, that's what Wikipedia is: a triumph of Solomon-like compromise over scholarship. Sigh. Give me some time. --Drmargi (talk) 20:45, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

If you're ever bored...

Hi. I don't know if you watch the series, but it doesn't matter, in order for your help in a new issue. This. The IP is trying to add a table of all the actors and, as you can see, I think the page is fine, as is. Help me smack a hand, fellow reverter. Thanks! — Wylie pedia 03:18, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh, these people who create tables for the sake of creating tables. They drive me batty!! I'll keep an eye on it. --Drmargi (talk) 05:12, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

"Monster"?

A bit harsh, like we'd call Jack the Ripper a monster, or Fred West. Especially harsh is the comparison to Eric. I don't recall telling other editors to F off or similar. But hey, you pays your money.... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:00, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

The monster is the double-standard they're governed by. My comments aren't actually a criticism of you, but more on the hypocrisy of the comments made about what you said (which is far milder than anything Corbett spews on a regular basis), and the scope of response to it, particularly from Corbett's Admin Acolyte in Chief, Drmies. By that standard my comments were, if anything, tame. Happy birthday to your little 'un! --Drmargi (talk) 20:07, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

I understand. I have no acolytes, just people determined to send me packing. Which I may well do, but then again, I may well not. Thanks for your birthday wishes, he had a great day and is now snoring! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:13, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

We haven't crossed paths much, but I've always thought of you as one of the good guys who does good work. It never fails that there will be those who seek drama, and in so doing, will find it (Corbett leaps to mind yet again). I suspect he of the Greek (?) ID will always see what he wants to see in your actions. Hang in there! --Drmargi (talk) 20:19, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh yes, it's a recurring theme. Thanks for your kind words. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:25, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to RfC

An RfC has been opened at Talk:Phineas and Ferb (season 4) aimed at resolving an issue with episode numbering. We're hoping that other experienced editors like you will drop in and leave appropriate comments. Thanks. --AussieLegend (✉) 04:13, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

For your enjoyment

Hi DM. I think you will enjoy the pics at this thread User talk:Ponyo#Happy Saint Lucia.27s Day.21. Enjoy the rest of your weekend! MarnetteD|Talk 20:15, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh, fun! Final grading underway, then a LONG e-mail! --Drmargi (talk) 21:56, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Rizzoli

Thanks for helping out. I previously reverted due to my apathy for anything seasonal worded as such. True, summer in the States would be apropos here, but someone in cooler climes might not grasp that. Ah, summer. — Wylie pedia 05:28, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

I always find the whole season thing a bit precious, but our Antipodean friends set great store by it, so I found the path of least resistance. --Drmargi (talk) 05:19, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

If you people would get your seasons right, there'd be no problems. ;) --AussieLegend (✉) 05:40, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

This from a man who spends his entire life upside down. --Drmargi (talk) 08:15, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

I can see how you might think that from your own inverted perspective. --AussieLegend (✉) 09:47, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah. I see the blood rushing to your head, and that of my map-posting pal. --Drmargi (talk) 12:43, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

One day we will rise up and flip every map on Wikipedia. --Mkativerata (talk) 11:52, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

June might as well be winter here, since it snows at times. — Wylie pedia 13:24, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Snow? Too sunny here for snow at any time. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:00, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

What's snow? Never heard of it. --Drmargi (talk) 17:09, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

It's that stuff that causes lengthy bureaucratic discussions. — Wylie pedia 05:16, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh. That. I remember something with a name like that on black-and-white television. --Drmargi (talk) 06:56, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

What's a "black-and-white television"??? — Wylie pedia 10:32, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Infant. I'm surrounded by upside down people and infants. Sigh... ;-) --Drmargi (talk) 21:56, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

I was kidding. We converted the family's first TV into an aquarium. I also miss the days when most networks signed off early. — Wylie pedia 04:30, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I know. Just joshing with you. --Drmargi (talk) 07:20, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

"I also miss the days when most networks signed off early" - You can simulate that by turning the TV off. --AussieLegend (✉) 11:43, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Nah, they'll just play it again at a later date. — Wylie pedia 23:46, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Right up your alley...

Ascension (TV series)#Timeline. I voiced my opinion of it at its talkpage. — Wylie pedia 17:09, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh, seriously? Fancruft and probably a copy-vio into the bargain. I'm off to the office for a few hours, but will weigh in when I can (not long.) --Drmargi (talk) 17:34, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Boom. — Wylie pedia 18:05, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Well done. You had plenty of ground to stand on. I see you're having fun with Helmboy and his penchant for ownership. I pulled the (pointless) demo figures again. --Drmargi (talk) 19:23, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Sigh. See below. Anything but discussion... --Drmargi (talk) 22:47, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

I noticed you deleted the post, don't you like being called out on a personal attack? helmboy 23:47, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Whole table for one additional column??????

You opinion that the ratings being low for Ascension (TV series) and the fact that it's only one additional column gives no merit or need for a completely separate comprehensive ratings table. Also most dramas on SyFy don't rate that highly any way. helmboy 21:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Your reversion with no reply shows a level of editor superiority expanded by the comment You've been reverted by multiple authors, ergo no consensus for inclusion. Take it to the talk page. One additional column doesn't require a pointless Talk page debate, just commonsense. helmboy 22:05, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, gee, I'm sorry I didn't get this answered on your timeline, but the telephone rang. Get over it. The fact remains that you DO NOT have consensus for the inclusion, you are obligated to discuss on the article talk page by policy, and common sense (not a compound word, BTW) simply doesn't enter into it. --Drmargi (talk) 22:18, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

@Helmboy:, you've been reverted by multiple editors so, yes, a talk page discussion is required, as much as you might not like it. As the editor seeking to add content, the burden is on you to convince all of the other editors that the content is worthy of addition to the article. It's not up to other editors to convince you that the content isn't required. I do disagree that the information should be in a separate table, as was indicated here. As you've pointed out,[2] a separate table isn't required for one column of information but that isn't the issue. The issue is whether the information belongs in the article at all, and at least 3 other editors say that it isn't, so you need to convince them that it does. Edit-warring to get the content into the article is not the way; all that is going to achieve is to get you blocked. --AussieLegend (✉) 23:36, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

First, regardless of the editor letting you have free reign to speak on their behalf on their own talk page, it is just very sad that you are actually doing so. Second, the issue stated by a second table being needed. As for the value of the so-called low metric figure, you could make the same case for not having the Viewer column which is used in determining the demo percentage. Lastly, as long as the metric figures are above zero, they have a value and I am certain the are other articles with even lower figures. And I notice you still have your morally, superior soapbox handy. Has WP started selling them yet? helmboy 23:58, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

PS, I should have known better, that editors like this have not evolved to allow for commonsense in articles rather than personal options. :sigh: helmboy 00:02, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

The only one attempting to push a personal preference is you, Helmboy.

AussieLegend is welcome on my talk page, and may contribute to any discussion any time. Talk pages are for discussion, and are not the private domain of the named editor. Any editor able and willing to discuss civilly is welcome to use another editor's talk page, including joining an ongoing discussion. You, on the other hand, given your petulance, sarcasm and insults, are not. This will serve notice that you, Helmboy, are no longer welcome on my talk page. Do not post here again. --Drmargi (talk) 00:43, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings DM

	Merry Christmas!
	Merry Christmas Drmargi, blessings and best wishes for 2015! MarnetteD\|Talk 17:47, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

AussieLegend (✉) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:HH2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Disambiguation link notification for December 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited San Dimas, California, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page South Hills High School. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Stop Being So Silly Please

Why on earth did you put a warning on MY talk page when it was me that issued the edit warring warnings? That is both redundant and juvenile considering I am the one being warred with! Two editors are going around and around attempting to prevent legitimate cites being added employing flimsy excuses and that is completely unforgivable. Twobells (talk) 23:08, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Because you're both edit warring and editing disruptively. You're at six reverts, you're ignoring consensus, you're not using reliable sources and your POV pushing. BSC is an American show, like it or not. The pittance Sky One contributed one season does not override that fact. --Drmargi (talk) 23:17, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Pittance? Sky paid half towards the first season which allowed the show to take off, so yes BSG was a US-UK co production and that is recognised by all industry insiders but not it seems desperate wiki editors. I am more than happy for the article to show that season one was a UK-US co production but it has to be added as there are legitimate cites stating so. Yes, I have reverted vandalism six times. Twobells (talk) 23:27, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I am not edit warring, I have warned both editors of their edit warring, I have had to revert their reversions nine times which after being warned repeatedly is a form of vandalism. Twobells (talk)

That's not going to fly and you know it. Edits with which you disagree do not remotely meet the criteria for vandalism. --Drmargi (talk) 23:28, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I am not disagreeing with anyone, all I attempted to do was add legitimate cites and update the article accordingly. Subsequently, my edits have been reverted nine times which is completely unacceptable using the most spurious excuses. Twobells (talk) 23:53, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

You can sugar coat this any way you want, but you are edit warring. The definition of vandalism is narrow, and our edits in no way meet the criteria for vandalism. That's yet another policy you need to review. Your lack of understanding of basic editorial policies is mounting, and displays a lack of competence to edit. --Drmargi (talk) 00:00, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I am not sugar coating anything but stating the facts, you and the other editor removed legitimate cites which is completely unacceptable and reflects, with respect your lack of competence and understanding of Wiki best practice not mine. I consider 9 reversions of legitimate citations for what seems no more than POV vandalism. Twobells (talk) 00:24, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year Drmargi!

Happy New Year!

Drmargi,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Wylie pedia 06:07, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.

Thank you! And a very Happy New Year to you, too!! --Drmargi (talk) 06:09, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

TG US S5 v S4

Stop changing the season 4 episodes to season 5. The official History and BBC webpages show that season 5 of Top Gear USA has yet to air. I don't care if any other little websites think it's season 5 or even, in fact, if the productions codes indicate they are part of season 5. They are not. If History - the makers of the bloody show - say it's season 4 then it is season 4. No ifs or buts. It is season 4. Please stop changing it. Mvanterati (talk) 22:20, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

The network website for the BBC is irrelevant; the American version of Top Gear (which is not called Top Gear USA) is not made by the BBC. The History Channel website has been inconsistent. We the most recent episodes premiered here, they were identified as Season 5. Why the difference on the website? Who knows; the change was made well in to the season's run. Check the press releases for the season and you'll see it was identifies as season 5 with season 5 production codes.

I suggest you use the talk page for the series for any further discussion, that you do so civilly, and that you remember that the standard here is consensus, not who is the bossiest. Bully-boy tactics and telling me what to do will get you nowhere. The standing version remains until you can gain consensus to make the change. --Drmargi (talk) 22:45, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion in which you are mentioned at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring by Twobells. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Twobells reported by User:AussieLegend (Result: ). Thank you. AussieLegend (✉) 13:00, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Notice Of Dispute Resolution Regarding International Co-Production

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hey hey, I wanted to bring this to your attention as a matter of urgency, best wishes. Twobells (talk) 17:15, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

There's nothing urgent about it. I see nothing new, and editors will participate/respond in their own time. Drmargi (talk) 18:13, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

It is not for you to respond to a DR but the administration, thanks. Twobells (talk) 10:57, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Au contraire. More reading you need to do. --Drmargi (talk) 15:59, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Sorry! I had no idea you were a DRN moderator, well, you can hardly moderate your own malicious edits can you? Twobells (talk) 11:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm the current coordinator over at DRN, where this case is pending. Just to avoid any misconceptions which may be pending here, I just want to point out that participation in moderated content dispute resolution at Wikipedia is always voluntary and no editor is ever required to participate. Having said that, however, I would strongly encourage all participants in this dispute to join in at DRN. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 17:36, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

What DRN? He's calling a discussion on the show talk page DRN; I've received no notice of anything further. This editor has a poor command of terms and policy. --Drmargi (talk) 19:00, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.