User talk:Drovethrughosts/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 9

The Shield season 5

Hi, not sure I'm doing this right (bit of a noob here) but I wanted to discuss an edit you undid of mine about the R2 version of season 5 of the Shield being shortened, for being unsourced. Now I know that apart from things like amazon reviews there is no official online source confirming this as Sony never made an official statement about it, but I actually own the source material. I have both the R1 and R2 versions of season 5. Anyway I can use that as a source? Upload something maybe? Please let me know, cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.211.100.37 (talk) 00:57, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

01/19/12 Just saw you updated it with a better source. Thanks for that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.211.100.37 (talk) 02:28, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem, I just did a Google search for a reliable source for this and found that. I was going to reply sooner, but I saw you readded the content, so I just went ahead and added the new reference. Glad everything worked out. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:35, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello!

Hello there! I hope you don't mind me asking but I saw your userbox, very well done. I see you have things that say "This user watches 24" and stuff like that. Well, I was wondering if you could tell me how to create a box like that. I've been working on my userbox and I want to put one that says "This user watches The Big Bang Theory." Do you know how to do that? Everyone else I spoke to didn't know how. If you could get back to me ASAP that would be great :) Creativity97 Talk? 16:46, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello! None of the userboxes displayed on my page were created by me, I just grabbed them from the various userbox listing pages such as this. Already created Big Bang Theory userboxes are located here. To make your own custom userboxes, you can look here. Hopefully that was somewhat helpful :) Drovethrughosts (talk) 23:31, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much! All your research was very helpful :) Creativity97 Talk? 15:26, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Fringe (TV series) taskforce proposal

Hi there! As a frequent editor to Fringe articles, I thought I'd let you know I'm proposing a new taskforce for the series. If you're interested, you can find the proposal page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Fringe (TV series). Thanks, Ruby 2010/2013 04:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Frank Stanton appeared in 4 episodes and 2 seasons of Fringe and you removed him as a recurring character?! While Michelle Krusiec only appeared in 3 episodes and one season and she's listed. He even had more dialogue than some of the characters listed as 'recurring.' Please will you reinstate him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cool938 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

SFU references in PC

Would you please not arbitrarily remove our addition of a reference in popular culture concerning SFU ? I am a music journalist and a music blogger too and it would be so much more pleasant if some WP editors were being un bit more "humble" and stopped removing references they consider irrelevant just because they're not aware of them or never heard of them... let's not make of WP a fascist micro-state run by a dozens. HarryBlock (talk) 22:11, 11 February 2012 (UTC)HarryBlock

You should probably read WP:Notability first. You're just using the music video itself as a reference, that doesn't establish notability at all. Are credible third-party sources discussing this music video as somehow being notable/important? If not, it doesn't belong on the page because it's not notable and not encyclopedic. Drovethrughosts (talk) 22:38, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

We've found different references concerning the artist MeeK who recorded a single about SFU. Deciding whether references do or do not "establish notability" is extremely subjective and relative by definition and are difficult to find in this context, this artist did give several interviews but none of them have clearly been about THIS song... But Meek appears to be indeed a well-known Indie artist in Europe (he's of a French and British double nationality apparently) and this is as valid a cultural reference as any other it seems. And if that was needed : you can always check the said SFU music video and you will well see this is indeed a real professional registered video by a professional recording artist on an official commercial channel on YouTube : http://www.youtube.com/meekinthewebHarryBlock (talk) 23:18, 11 February 2012 (UTC)HarryBlock

Sorry, but if you understand the guidelines of notability on Wikipedia, it is not really subjective. The artist itself may be notable (he does have an article), but that doesn't mean you can place a line in the Six Feet Under article saying he made a song about that. Keep that information in his article, where it's notable and where it belongs. You provided several references, but none of them provide any notability.

• WBMT Agency – provides nothing but an advertisement for the artist.
• MusicBrainz – nothing but a track listing for the album.
• Freebase – simply just another listing for the artist.
• CLAUS – a random music blog. The link you provided simply mentions he has a song called "Six Feet Under".
• YouTube – the music video itself, another self-promoting link.
• Lyrics Bay – Lyrics for the song.

None of the references are useful. If anything it just seems as one big advertisement for this artist, which is what Wikipedia is not for. You responded earlier using the word "we"ve" as in your apart of some entity/group trying to push this artist's information on Wikipedia. That's a conflict of interest. You've also almost exclusively edited the Meek article as well, which is written in a very "promotional" type manner, keep using the words like "internet buzz". Bottom line: the artist has a song inspired by the TV show, but beyond that there's nothing notable that makes its inclusion in the article worth it beyond wanting to advertise this artist. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:11, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Reversion

I'm curious about this reversion. How was that WP:Vandalism? Toddst1 (talk) 14:11, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

It's addition of unsourced content. Upcoming television episodes must be sourced for their episode titles and air dates. Drovethrughosts (talk) 14:13, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

True, and I admire your commitment to WP:V. Toddst1 (talk) 14:19, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I am curious though, why did you ask? Given you're a Wikipedia administrator, the addition of unsourced content is an easy candidate for reversion; unless you're unaware of the rules regarding television episodes. Just asking, because I'm curious as to why you asked me. Thanks. Drovethrughosts (talk) 14:23, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually, addition of unsourced info is sort a grey area in terms of the appropriate use of rollback. Until a little over a year ago, it couldn't be used for anything that wasn't WP:Vandalism. You seem to be using it responsibly.

I had stumbled across this which seemed a bit heavy-handed and thought I'd open a dialog with you. Sometimes a simple inquiry such as that starts a discussion that uncovers a serious problem - more often than you'd think.

You seem to be a solid contributor and your reaction to my question was very good. As far as being heavy-handed, I can be described that way as well. After 20,000 edits as you have, some of us put up with less nonsense than others. Keep up the good work. Toddst1 (talk) 14:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. See ya around. :) Drovethrughosts (talk) 15:49, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Have you considered becoming an admin? For most folks, the tough part there is navigating the grey areas, which I see you have a very good grasp of. You've got plenty of edits. Just a thought. Toddst1 (talk) 17:51, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Adminship? Not much as I haven't looked in that really. Administrative duties do interest me a bit though, as I do enjoy "cleaning things up" and organizing things. My only concern is the bulk of my edits are limited to a certain area of Wikipedia (TV show-related articles). I'm also not all that comfortable with nominating myself, like, "look at me!". That's not my personality. I'd prefer to be nominated by someone else, because it shows they think you deserve it. Drovethrughosts (talk) 21:30, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Let me know if you want to be nominated, now or down the road. Toddst1 (talk) 21:35, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for showing interest in me. If I'd want go through with it, I'd first definitely have to do some more research regarding the process and brush up on some Wikipedia policies beforehand. Thanks again. Drovethrughosts (talk) 16:40, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Mad Men

Thanks for your help with Mad Men. Can you make sure that the TCA Awards get added to season 2.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:46, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Also, don't overlook nominations in Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Guest Actor in a Drama Series.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:23, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

You should not have reverted my removal of the non-notable actor from the Mad Men infobox. He doesn't even has his own article. Rather than revert a regular editor, you should have discussed this first on the talk page. El duderino (talk) 05:02, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't feel a discussion was needed since he's a main cast member now, thus he should appear among everyone else in the infobox, regardless if he has an article yet. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:42, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Friends episodes

Just to let you know, the table style has been discussed here: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Friends episodes/archive1. Reviewers have come to a conclusion that WP:TRANSCLUSION should be discouraged, per WP:BOLD and MOS:DTT. Feel free to add your two cents on the matter or make a comment regarding the list there. -- Lemonade51 (talk) 21:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I was unaware of that. I just kinda stumbled upon the pages and was confused why they're not using the standard episode list formatting, and why the List of episodes page didn't just transclude the tables from the season articles, as that seems to be standard across any pages I've come seen. Well, if that's what other people think should be done, go ahead. I don't watch the articles, so it won't bother me. Feel free to revert my edits. Drovethrughosts (talk) 21:35, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Mad Men S5

You deleted the explanatory text I put "It is scheduled to consist of thirteen episodes, with the premiere being a two-hour double episode. (The AMC website lists it as "Episode 1-2"" )". And added "with a two-episode premiere", with the comment "(a little cleaner. there was no concern over the numbering until you brought it up. it's simple: there's 13 episodes and the premiere is 2 episodes.)

You may think it's "cleaner" but now it makes the dubious statement that the first episode "A Little Kiss" is "two episodes". There was no "part 1 and part 2", it was a single, continuous episode. To number a single episode "1-2" is not "simple", it's unusual and requires an explanation.

The whole reason I came to that article at all was to find out what "episode 1-2" meant, and how many episodes were in the season. Not finding any clarity there, I found sources and put them in, for you to delete again few days later.

I'm not going to edit war, but you did not improve the article with your change. Barsoomian (talk) 19:25, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

How is it a "dubious" statement that "A Little Kiss" is two episodes? It is two episodes. If it wasn't, then it'll be labeled as simply episode 1 by AMC, but it's not. If we were to label it just as 1, then the season finale would end being numbered 12 in the episode list, which is incorrect, because AMC ordered 13 episodes (like they do for every season). It's a bit stubborn to argue against facts. Anyway, onto the other thing: for one, I didn't delete your reference, the AMC reference is still intact. I removed the bit "(The AMC website lists it as "Episode 1-2") because it seems a bit expository, and something that shouldn't be included in the body text. That's why the reference is there, it's serving that purpose. I simply changed the wording. "Two-hour double episode" is somewhat convoluted, "two-episode premiere" easily implies two episodes. If you still want to include the expository text, I think it's better placed as part of the reference, or used a note beside the episode numbering. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:34, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

You are invited.....

As a recent contributor to List of Friends episodes you are invited to a discussion at Talk:List of Friends episodes#Disputed changes, which is discussing recent changes that involve replacement of transclusion with custom tables. Thank you. --AussieLegend (talk) 01:51, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Template help

Hi, DTG. I was wondering if you could look at the template for Once Upon a Time and help me figure out why the "V*T*E" (the ability to view/discuss/edit the template) shows up as a red link on pages like its main page. I also listed the problem at the template's talk page. The only way I've been able to work on in it is to type "Template:Once..." into my URL line. Thanks. — WylieCoyote (talk) 18:00, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

It seems I fixed the problem. It was just a guess on my part, but there you go! And thanks for creating a Killing userbox, I'll probably put one on my userpage later. Drovethrughosts (talk) 01:42, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I did not notice the (TV series) was missing from the title. That would explain a lot. Thanks again. Enjoy the userbox! I tried to make some for everyone! — WylieCoyote (talk) 02:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Episode lists

Hey Drovethrughosts, I'm not gonna undo your edit again, we'll have to agree to differ. However, it was handy you notified me of the Dexter and Stargate episode lists in your edit summary. Interestingly, neither of them had such a lead image when they were promoted. In any case, they're both way below current standards, so I've left a to-do list on the respective talk pages. I don't know if you're particularly interested in updating either (or both), any improvements would be gratefully accepted. If the lists aren't updated soon, then I'll be listing them for demotion at WP:FLRC. I think I'll need to check over a few more of these more-ancient lists. Thanks again, The Rambling Man (talk) 14:22, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

That image (The Walking Dead) has been displayed as such since it was added, so that's why I undid your edits. It's simply a text logo with a transparent background, it looks cleaner without being displayed as thumbnail, and an (in my opinion) unnecessary caption saying it's the logo. Any other type of image would obviously need a caption and be displayed as a thumb. And several list of episodes pages that I watch that use a similar type of image (text logo with transparent background) are all displayed like that. I don't watch/edit either the Stargate or Dexter pages (or the shows themselves), I simply used them as examples from the featured lists, so no, I'm not interested in editing them. But, I guess I'm happy I unawarely brought up issues that should be dealt with on those pages I guess. Later. Drovethrughosts (talk) 15:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Looking at it, I can see the arguments for both sides—thumbnail would be needless, but there's something oddly jarring about the lack of one. Perhaps if an infobox were constructed based on {{Infobox television season}} (individual fields could be bashed out but I imagine total number of episodes, number of seasons, première date, etc would work) then a thumbnail-free image could be housed in it. I can see myself working on similar lists soon so I'd be happy to help construct something if that seems like a good route to take. GRAPPLE X 15:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

As I said, we'll agree to disagree. I have never knowingly seen a FL go through without a thumb. Anyway, once again thanks for enlightening me as to the poor state of many of our television episode FLs. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:19, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Awake

I see you have contributed to the Awake articles. Before interest in the series is lost forever, you might want to consider expanding episode articles and templates now while contributors are still engaged. If the Awake article and episode articles reach GA status, there could be an Awake Good Topic. --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Your opinion is needed

Hi, DTG. Could you weigh in on an issue? The category for The Killing's userboxers has been nommed for deletion. I would appreciate your support. Thanks. — WylieCoyote (talk) 18:52, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I just made a comment. I'm mainluy curious why that category is being targeted for deletion, when there's hundreds of similar categories like that. Drovethrughosts (talk) 19:18, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

My sentiments exactly! Someone has too much free time on their hands. Thanks for the support! — WylieCoyote (talk) 19:48, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Buffy Pages

Hello! I recently nom'd "Welcome to the Hellmouth" for GA and was wondering if you wanted to help me start whipping some of the Buffy pages into shape? I want to start up on season 4 if I have time. I think I'm also going to nominate Adam, which I heavily tweaked. Anyway, just thought I'd ask. I'd love to get the ball rolling like what's happening with The X-Files taskforce.--Gen. Quon (talk) 05:02, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd definitely be glad to help as much as I can, especially with anything Buffy related! I know you do fantastic episode articles (X-Files), so it'd be great to see some more of the Buffy episode articles get cleaned up, as most are mainly plot/trivia. Anyway, I see you use lots of book sources (such as for Adam, which looks awesome now, good job, btw!), which I don't have access to. In terms of sources, I could definitely add anything from web sources and especially information found on the DVDs from featurettes and commentaries. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:40, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

I ordered several of the guidebooks from my library, so I'm waiting for those to arrive. Quite a few of them are available online at Google books, too. As for Adam, a good chunk of the sources were already there, I just organized the page, spiffed it up, fixed the lede, and added a reception section.--Gen. Quon (talk) 14:50, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Awake WikiProject Proposal

I see you have worked on serveal of articles on Awake. Feel free to vote here for it to have a WikiProject. TBrandley • talk • contributions 07:07, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Damages

Wow, that's a lot of great work on the Damages article! μηδείς (talk) 21:18, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I recently completed watching the first four seasons, so I finally got around to do a clean-up the main article. Drovethrughosts (talk) 22:12, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

McClarenTruth.org

DirecTV has set up an actual website that Ryan Phillipe's character runs in the new season of Damages: http://www.mcclarentruth.org/. Do you think this is relevant info that should be added to the season five page?

Sure, I don't see why not. Seems like good relevant info to me. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:16, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know...

I commented on this: Talk:List of Undeclared episodes#Merge episode list to main article. QuasyBoy (talk) 00:04, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I saw that. I left a message on the editors talk page that undid the merge, to note him of the discussion. Drovethrughosts (talk) 21:23, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Six Feet Under

Isn't it set in Los Angeles? Fuddle (talk) 00:31, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't even realize I reverted your edit. That was completely an accident. Sorry for that. Anyway, actually, I'm not 100% sure if it's actually set in LA or not, I don't think it's specifically mentioned in the show. I did some searching, and according to this article, it says just Southern California, and not LA specifically. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

No probs. I was working on cleaning up the categories. Fuddle (talk) 13:51, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Twin Peaks

Thanks for that last fix. Much improved! ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 16:12, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

No problem, I saw the error, and made the appropriate fixes. Thanks. Drovethrughosts (talk) 17:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I just think we all need to make as much effort pointing out when other editors do something good as we do pointing out when they fuck up. Or, anyway, I feel I need to do so. Cheers! ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 21:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for catching the dab...

...on The Killing (season 2). I didn't catch it when first adding it, neither did the guy who "removed" it, nor did I in putting it back. Like they say, it takes a "fresh set of eyes". — WylieCoyote (talk) 23:14, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

The Wire

Please read Talk:The Wire#Police procedural.--Galazan (talk) 10:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Request

Hi! On this image, it has been requested that the company credits, which, on this, is Global's logo on the right side. I noticed that you have Photoshop from before, and was wondering if you could remove that "Global >" from the bottom right side. Only ask since I don't have Photoshop. Cheers, TBrandley 03:04, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done. :) Drovethrughosts (talk) 12:25, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! TBrandley 14:01, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you very much for undoing my formatting work. Thanks, now we're back to eleven frigging references for a single assertion. Not that those references aren't necessary for a strong assertion like that, but it looks utterly ridiculous. Ah well, I know better than to fight for anything on Wikipedia anymore. Your way is clearly worse, but you're the established owner, and who the fuck am I. --87.78.237.165 (talk) 19:01, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Hold up there. This isn't called for. See the talk page. — Hex (❝?!❞) 07:51, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

List of Arrested Development episodes

Just wanted to say good work for the formatting and re-working on the ratings information on the Arrested Development season one page. I was about to do the exact same thing, but you've saved me the trouble. So well done! SchrutedIt08 (talk) 13:15, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Are you referring to the re-addition of the production codes that were inexplicably deleted when the ratings info was added? I didn't even realize they were missing until I looked at the list of episodes page. Thanks though, man! Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:22, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah it was the prod. codes. Something was up, but since I'm a little dim, it took me a while to figure out what it was, haha. SchrutedIt08 (talk) 13:36, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey, this is completed unrelated, but I thought I'd ask here instead of starting a new section on your talk page. Any chance you're not against reverting back and using the season two poster art in the infobox for The Walking Dead (season 2), I'm asking because you uploaded the image, so I wanted to ask first. Seasons 1 and 3 both use poster art, and the DVD cover is basically a duplicate of poster. Thoughts? Thanks. Drovethrughosts (talk) 15:07, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Not at all. I only uploaded it because I figured it was what most other pages do. Seems like a custom, so I went along with it. But I don't mind at all. SchrutedIt08 (talk) 15:27, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay cool. Yeah, DVD covers are usually customary, but posters are used as well sometimes (24, Lost, Mad Men), and since season 1 used the poster, might as well continue the tradition. Thanks. Drovethrughosts (talk) 15:31, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey Drovethrughosts, would you be willing to comment or support at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Arrested Development/archive1 and Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Arrested Development episodes/archive1? Thanks. -- Wikipedical (talk) 07:35, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I've added my support for both articles. Good luck! Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Invitation!

Hi. Would you like to join the Awake task force? TBrandley 14:52, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey, first, I'd like to say I greatly admire all the work you've done for Awake-related articles, it's really great work. Secondly, I'll have to decline. It's simply because I don't join Wikiprojects. I don't like to feel obligated to contribute to articles. I'll contribute at the same rate whether my name is on a Wikiproject or not. Still, I'll happily help out if you need any in getting Awake to FA. Thanks. Drovethrughosts (talk) 21:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! That's totally fine, if I need help though I will let you know. Don't need any at this time. Cheers, TBrandley 21:58, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Duplicated references

Nice catch. I should've checked to see if they were already cited. Cliff Smith 17:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm always keeping my eyes open. Cheers! Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:19, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

One Eyed Jacks

I notice that you have made no efforts in regard to the following:

1. Listing the page for discussion.
2. Providing references.
3. Moving the material elsewhere.

I suggest you try doing one of these.--MacRusgail (talk) 14:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

1. Not every redirect is worthy of a discussion. The page is a just a short plot summary of a fictional location on a television series, please tell me how that meets Wikipedia notability in any way.
2. Why should I place references when I feel the article isn't necessary?
3. All the relevant plot details are in the List of Twin Peaks characters article.

--Drovethrughosts (talk) 19:18, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

The third claim is untrue. The first is subjective, as is the second.--MacRusgail (talk) 12:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Homeland edit war

Hello, I'm concerned about your recent actions on Homeland (TV series). You classified a clearly good-faith edit by an IP user as vandalism. This is a content disagreement, and I don't see it as vandalism. Also note that this user is quite possibly a newbie, see WP:BITE. I don't think calling him an idiot is going to help anything. Finally, you have also broken the WP:3RR. Please try to solve this dispute through the talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Edit warring will get you nowhere. Silvrous ^Talk 18:23, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

No, sorry, it is vandalism and not good-faith by the other editor. It's completely unhelpful and disruptive editing of keeping correct and properly formatted content in the article. It's not a disagreement of disputed content, it's simply disruptive editing. I did respond on the talk page (please read that), leaving a detailed list of why it is vandalism and unhelpful. I'm off to work in a minute, so I don't have time for this, so just please make sure my edits do not get reverted again. Thank you. Drovethrughosts (talk) 18:30, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Silvrous, when defense of vandalism comes up at the top of my watchlist it is pretty hard for me to not reply. What DTG has been dealing with is someone who makes what i think of as "pretty vandalism". It isn't anything obvious like "yo mamma..." or "Maureen W has huge..." but rather stuff that without actually thinking about it looks like it totally belongs. Showtime isn't broadcast in progressive scan in either resolution. Removing a proper link to the channel in favour of a disambiguation page "pretties" the code but vandalises the content. The catch in this is that it is so sneaky that it reverting it is not usually considered an exemption to 3rr, or in other words the vandalism per the policy gets to remain. Why? Because as you proved by creating this section, it is not obvious to the average person that 480p is not a correct broadcast format for 99.999999999999% of shows in North America these days. The last time that 480p was a regularly used format in North American television that i can recall was for FOX "High Resolution Digital Television". FOX switched from EDTV to HDTV in the summer of 2004. Shows such as girls club, the first half of North Shore, Wonderfalls, and the first season of Arrested Development were shown in SDTV and EDTV and their articles could appropriately have 480p listed as a picture format for broadcast. Most other US broadcast networks and cable channels made the jump from SD straight to HD. At the time in Canada Bell's satellite service offered a down-conversion from 1080i or 720p (as applicable) to 480p of select shows on a dedicated channel. It was a way to promote the 'coming soon / now available' of HD hardware and channels to their offerings for customers. But it wasn't the native broadcast format of the shows. I just happen to be one of those people who used to watch CSI Miami on that in-house EDTV channel and still recalls EDTV enough to be surprised at seeing it listed for a current show many years after it became obsolete. Hence sneaky "pretty vandalism". delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 19:59, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

• Hi there. This incident was reported at WP:AN3; you can leave a comment there but it's simply not necessary since your stance on the matter is clear and I've decided on the report already. Firstly, it's clear to me you were edit warring. Period. I simply see nothing that indicates this user is a sneaky vandal. The user may be in the wrong, but I don't think, overall, anything in their editing warrants an outright assumption of bad faith. In fact, I see nothing that indicates this user isn't acting in good faith at this point. I understand this can get frustrating, but your comments to them were unnecessarily bitey. While this may sound like ridiculous civility policing, I guarantee you that a polite attempt to work with a new user will go farther than dismissive, bitey lecturing. If it fails, we simply deal with it another way. But bottom line here, I just want to remind you that believing you're in the right doesn't excuse edit warring and that there are more effective ways of dealing with these disputes. Discussion is essential. Given the fact that you're a long term editor in good standing, I didn't think that a block was necessary right now, but your blatant assumption of bad faith above and mislabeling of this as vandalism certainly made me less inclined to stand by that position. Believe me, I'm well aware of the incredibly subtle infobox vandalism/disruption that commonly occurs in these articles. In many cases it's indeterminable whether we're dealing with actual vandalism or good faith but disruptive editing, but a block is almost always warranted just to contain the situation. If it gets to that point, there is a simple solution. It's not at that point. Why don't you try actually working with this user for a while? Swarm ^X 03:34, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I left a few comments in various places about this now, so all my feelings are out now. I just found it odd he reported me, given he actually undid my work first. And by that I mean an actual "undo revision", my first edit was fixing his mistakes, which then he undid several times. Well, I tried working with the editor, trying to open a dialog, even going ahead and fixing up some small errors on pages he's created or edited that I wouldn't have otherwise, and he has made it clear he can care less about what I say or do, so whatever. He's not worth my time anymore. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:45, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Jesus Christ, I tell him I even helped out on articles he's created, including fixing a problem he's said he needed fixed in an edit summary, and he spits in my face telling me not to edit articles he's created. What an ungrateful jerk. Drovethrughosts (talk) 22:53, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Axel

How can anyone say that "Axel" is a recurring character after he had appeared for a few seconds at the end of an episode and may have had one line? If he is indeed to become a recurring character, that hasn't happened yet. Obviously you had read something somewhere that makes you think that. But without a cite it's just speculation. If it's about a future episode, and it's not given a reference, I have to delete it. Barsoomian (talk) 04:31, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: Lost

No problem, I was meaning to fix those links myself as well! You got me started. -- Wikipedical (talk) 05:25, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

unexplained deletion on Freaks and Geeks

In general, it is best to use the edit summary box to explain your edits. Simply removing material without explanation, especially a second time, after an explanation was requested, could be viewed as disruptive. Could you please explain your justification for removing this information? Thank you. Dlabtot (talk) 00:42, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Because the addition makes no sense. Do you understand what it's trying to say? It says "the name of the school district and high school he attended", who is "he" referring to? It makes it seem that the fictional characters actually attended a high school called William McKinley in real life...um what? It's possible it's meant to say that the high school Paul Feig (series creator) went to was called Chippewa Valley High School. The way it stands right it, it's completely unclear, badly written/formatted, and incorrect. I'll fix it up in a bit. Drovethrughosts (talk) 01:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

yes, it was perfectly clear, but whatever, your version is fine as well. Dlabtot (talk) 15:11, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

How is a sentence that randomly says the pronoun "he" when you have no idea who it's referring to clear? For all we know, it could be referring to John Francis Daley, because Paul Feig is mentioned nowhere in that section. So no, it wasn't clear and I properly fixed it. And it also stated the high school name was the same, which is incorrect. So no, it couldn't have stayed the way it was in the article. But like you said, whatever. Drovethrughosts (talk) 18:59, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Missing episode in Lost

Hey mate, just to let you know: The list of lost episodes is missing the one last clipshow before the final episode: http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/Lost:_The_Final_Journey

best regards, A fellow lost viewer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.243.225.39 (talk) 00:20, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello there. Actually that clip show is listed in the article, it's the very last one. Thanks anyway. :) Drovethrughosts (talk) 14:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Help

Hi! I hate to bother, but could you help me with File:Penticton Regional Airport logo.gif. The blue needs to be removed, and the logo should be transparent. Thank you very much, TBrandley 20:51, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

It's updated, my friend. Hope you find it satisfactory, just tell me otherwise. Drovethrughosts (talk) 21:52, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

TBrandley is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, 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 Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

TBrandley 22:11, 24 December 2012 (UTC)