Archives

Main Talk Page February - December 2006 January - March 2007 April 2007 - Present

Thankyou for your consistent work on Hurricane Neddy, although I think the article needs to be rewritten to match the level of Homer Badman, a passed GA. I have failed the article for GA although the only fault seems to be the way it is written, the content is mostly there. If possible, could the cultural references section be expanded a little? Thanks, JameiLei 16:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note if you're interested in a source, Grampa's currently on the cover of Maclean's magazine. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 21:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have written an AWB plugin which you can use for assessments and which will make the process much easier. It's shipped with AWB in the Plugins\Kingbotk folder. See User:Kingbotk/Plugin/User guide for more info. --kingboyk 17:00, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My plugin isn't just a bot, it does assessments too. See the Kingbotk\Plugins folder and move the two .dll files from that folder to the same folder as the awb.exe. Restart AWB and you'll get a plugins menu. --kingboyk 17:00, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ignoring the fact that You Only Move Twice is on hold... "Why is it always so that you wait weeks for any GA reviews and then one happens whilst your asleep!" Anyway thanks for sorting out those problems on EVMDNJ, much appreciated. Also, over the last few days I've been trying to fully reference List of guest stars on The Simpsons. It hasn't actually been that hard. The offcial site, the BBC pages and the Ray Richmond book meant that the first 10 seasons are fully referenced. (well apart from a couple, which are marked) But now the later seasons are going to be harder because the offcial site is up to date. Ah well. I'm building it here: User:Gran2/Sandbox, note that this is just the list part, and not the lead and other stuff. Anyway. Gran² 06:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You Only Move Twice is good, just the last modifications on the talk page. Speaking of slow GA nominations, you wouldn't mind reviewing The Transformers (IDW Publishing) for me? Alientraveller 12:27, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the date change, for now anyway. Darwin is still there meaning that April 19 hasn't been decided yet, although it will almost certainly be Darwin. Anyway, we clearly have the 3 dates listed, Raul will move the nomination if neccessary I'm sure. Also in moving, you deleted all of the comments underneath, which still need to be kept even if the article isn't selected for one of the dates. And you switched back to the fair use image, when there is now a perfectly relevant free use image avaliable, which is a much better thing to use as we won't have any complaints against it. All in all I didn't really see the point in moving them now, hence why I reverted. If you think you had good reason to, then by all means do it again, but on this evidence I see no need for it to change just yet. Gran² 12:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay that's fine, but the image is better, I mean I know it isn't very high quality, but its free use. Which in the eyes of FA will always be better than a fair use one. Gran² 16:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, scratch that. Just found this much clearer image [1], I've left it to Maitch to upload. Gran² 16:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With all the respect I have to the Simpsons, they used the title because it's a well known phrase, which happens to have a very specific meaning. *That* meaning should be the basic entry in Wikipedia. There are links to Blood feud all over the place. There are even links to Blood Feud, which do not refer to the Simpsons page. Before deleting disambiguation pages, please check what links to that page. Unless you want to start hunting down every link, fixing it, and making sure no future person who happens to think blood feud actually means what it means would link to the wrong page. Misheu 16:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - why no quotes? Probably a copyright problem? Thanks... Gekritzl 23:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My addition to the article was NOT vandalism. Every part of the paragraph was sourced- from the Treehouse of Horror episode in which the Homer Clones were first established (XII) and how in the end of that episode it is revealed that the only surviving Homer is a clone, up to the episode "Day of the Louse" in which said personality attacks the effigy of Homer exclaiming "Now I'm the real Homer!". In addition, even if you disagree with the addition, discussion of it on the talk page is the proper course of action. It was wildly inappropriate of you, and I would appreciate it if you did not do that again. Ex-Nintendo Employee 02:25, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for cutting down that page. It's way too long, and probably shouldn't even exist. --TeckWiz is now R ^ParlateContribs_@(Lets go Yankees!) 05:30, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why did the list of political affiliations get deleted and then reverted away? I don't see anything in talk. (RookZERO 23:31, 21 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

The interview mentioned in the Volcanoless in Canada article was on MuchMusic, a cable television channel in Canada which serves a similar market as MTV in the United States. I think that is enough of an assertion of notability to avoid speedy deletion, but I do not know if it would pass AfD in its current state. --Eastmain 21:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

btw, you forgot to sign it! Govvy 15:49, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• explain GA status??

some of the episodes say none, and some don't have it listed if there isn't one...why don't u make it consistent? Ctjf83 03:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hey, is that director accurate, or a vandal? Ctjf83 01:11, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still think it can be shortened, as there are many other pages (especially for TV shows or movie) that are like this. -- SilvaStorm

But there are still other pages which have a shortened title than their "official" one. -- SilvaStorm

Okay, don't need to get touchy on the subject. It's just my own opinion. -- SilvaStorm

Yes, I could help. Sorry I've been neglecting the WikiProject lately - I also just finished up with finals (25 page research paper... oof). I don't do much writing though, so if that's what's needed I probably can't help much. I can help with general editing, copyediting, finding sources, etc, so if that would be useful let me know. Natalie 01:44, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only problem I can foresee is my lack of DVDs right now. I had to put all my stuff in the on-campus storage for the summer, including my DVDs, and I can't get at them for awhile. So I can't provide any DVD commentary refs. Natalie 01:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm not too sure how to send messages, so I'm putting this here.

I want to ask, why did you reverse my changes to Survivor: Fiji? What I wrote about Moto and Ravu in the records section are true. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lkc159 (talk • contribs) 08:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Whoops, forgot to sign. Lkc159 08:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I was really into this article because Brodeur is my favorite athlete, so I enjoyed every bit of it. For my next FA-attempt, I've already done a ton of editing on Dominik Hasek. It's not too far away, I think. Sportskido8 00:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed that you deleted a lot of Simpsons episode images, saying they had no FU rationale. I was wondering if next time, you could inform myself or the Simpsons WikiProject and we would be more than happy to add some rationale. Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 15:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The images can be undeleted if rationales can be provided. There's no need to inform WikiProjects - really they ought to be proactive and make sure that images they use are not speedy candidates just waiting to be deleted. --bainer (talk) 14:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please come join the WikiProject Ice Hockey Notability standards for hockey players discussion. I'd like to see input from all our project members who have an opinion. Thanks! ColtsScore 00:01, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I owe you something of an apology. When reverting your removal of the warning templates on this page, I was under the belief that policy stated people are not allowed to remove their warnings. However, upon further investigation, I discovered that there is in fact still a lengthy discussion about this, and at the moment there is no consensus. So I apologise for reverting your user page twice, and in hindsight, I probably should have initiated a discussion with you rather than issue the standard warning templates, especially considering how long you've been here. However, on that note, I would have hoped that someone at who has been at Wikipedia for so long would know better than to remove a perfectly valid maintenance template in an article, but even doing that doesn't excuse my actions. I hope you see where I'm coming from, and accept my apology. Cheers, -Panser Born- (talk) 12:32, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well we better start using this, so...

		The Simpsons (Annoyed Grunt)-star
		I hereby award you The Simpsons star, for all of your edits that have improved articles relating to The Simpsons. Gran2 10:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, getting one in return was the general idea, ha ha ;). Thanks. Gran² 17:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a logical reason why you deleted several additions I made to Crook and Ladder? (Namely the trivia section and an edition to the cultural references?) I'm inclined to add them again if you can't provide a reason for the removal... --Jellyroll713

The article Mountain of Madness you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:Mountain of Madness for eventual comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations. The Sunshine Man 16:28, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking about a new project WikiProject Westerns or WikiProject Spaghetti Westerns dedicated to westerns. Interested? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 19:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm not really a big Western fan, I just happen to really like The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{ArticleHistory}} is for completed featured content and GA processes, and does not handle candidates like FAC, FLC, or FTC. Those are added to the template when the process is completed. Your three recent additions were populating the articlehistory error category, so I reverted them. I didn't re-add the correct template as I'm not sure which one it is for featured topics, and I'm on a slow dialup today. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

File:Film Reel Series by Bubbels.jpg

You voted for the Cinema Collaboration of the week, and it has been chosen as The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Please help improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia film article.

--PhantomS 07:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On recent changes patrol, I reverted your deletion of potential 2008 nominees in Inductees of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, but I changed it back, due to your claim of it being POV. I think I jumped the gun a bit. Sorry about that. -Everyguy 17:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am still relatively new to the editing process, but I don't really understand what constitutes your clean-up of the article. How does one determine objectively what to delete and what to leave? For example, you removed a reference to the first male African-American winner, but kept a statement regarding the absence of closing statements. Why was one deemed worthy to remain in the article and the other not?

Thank you for your time.

Eleos^Prime 19:39, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I read under in the list of South Park episodes, you said something like (rv. Vandalism). What do you mean I vandialized? --Warholio

I never vandalized, deleted large chunks of text or unsourced anything. something's screwed up. I just added appropriate additional info about the "Night of the Living Homeless" episode and what else it relates to: Shawn of the dead.

Please don't delete large chunks of text and label it "cleanup". Corvus cornix 01:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know that to link you need the brackets ( [[ ]]) but how do I link to pages with different words other than the title? For example, you can link to the World War II page using World War II with World War II inside the double brackets. Second World War with Second World War inside the double brackets links to the same page. How can I do the same thing?Warholio 15:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Use [[article name|description]] number29 15:41, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I figures out how to get templates on my user page where it shows "This user lives in Arizona" with a AZ flag next to it. Is there a page on Wikipedia where there is every example on which templates you can pick? If there are, help please. Warholio 19:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all members, and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. --Nehrams2020 00:37, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scorpion, please make truthful edit summaries, and not ones like this. --R ^ParlateContribs_@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 20:16, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found this Template:SimpsDVD. If it's not gonna be used, can you please {{db-author}} it ? --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I removed the fair-use gallery in WWE Championship, as it is decorative. We actually have pretty strict guidelines for the use of fair use images, including a resolution by the Wikimedia Foundation that use of fair-use images must be absolutely minimal. In the case of this article, the fair-use images are decorative. Simply stating that the belt design has changed over time may be appropriate, a fair-use image or two even may be to illustrate the changes (perhaps of the original and latest design). A full gallery is decorative and inappropriate. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not put include templates in other template like you did for {{Zeldaproj}}. Although every article within the scope of Zelda Project might be within the scope of Nintendo Games and Video Games projects that does not mean that all three projects must have same class and importance assesments. While every Zelda game is Top importance for the Zelda project they are not Top importance for the Video Games project. This stacking also creates problems for the {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} and is not forward compatible in the case of major changes in the included templates. Shinhan 10:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit to List of The Simpsons episodes (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 01:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Londonflag.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right: I should've previewed the changes. It didn't sound nearly that unwieldy and clumsy in my head. How about "Seven Wonders: Judges' Selections" and "Seven Wonders: Audience Selections"? --Rrburke^(talk) 03:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think now it's worse. --Rrburke^(talk) 04:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hang on: you just fixed it. --Rrburke^(talk) 04:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alas, it's bad again. --Rrburke^(talk) 04:04, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Either way, I would not feel comfortable passing judgement on that list again as I have already failed it once before. The criteria says that the list must reach consensus to promote or the list fails. Maybe I'm taking the criteria too literally, but right now I do not believe I can form an opionion as to whether this list should fail or pass.--十八 02:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's true, I'll try and find a cite for it. Gran² 05:44, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I can't find one, its bound to be in the DVD commentary, so I'll add it in when Season 10 has been released and I have it. And thinks for the praise, I need to re-work the biography section, get an image from the Planet of the Apes Musical, get any info from the DVD commentaries of Spin-Off and 138th, plus any other internet links I can find. Do you have any other web links, or DVD commentaries that having any good info about Troy? After all that it'll be done and I'll stick it into the article. Gran² 16:03, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I saw that as wel, but its user submitted so it can't be used. On a side note, had a bit a trouble with a really annoying IP (User talk:86.143.152.201), I'm pretty sure its over now, but I need some back up if it gets worse, they guy vandilised my userpage several times. Gran² 17:58, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I saw that and the guy has caused havoc on several pages. I was going to report him, but I think he's done now. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Gran² 18:03, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I know about Paulo, that's a good article, although not the basis for my work on McClure, that was actually Jack Sparrow which I also think is FA quality. Anyway, I will try and get Troy's page to FA, but GA first. As it was Hartman's last season, I'm guessing that Season 10 will have something to do with him, and the commentaries for the first two episodes will be packed with info. I really need a free use image of Phil, but the chances of finding one of those are 0%, ah well. Gran² 21:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I don't think there is an official recommendation of plot length yet, but I think on WP:EPISODE it's being talked about (I think someone recommended following the Doctor Who wikiproject which is apparently 10 words for every minute, but I'm not sure exactly). I guess the plot isn't really excessive (even though it is 2 paragraphs longer than Cape Feare), and the simpsons project is keeping it in check anyway. Phydend 02:37, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: I'd be happy to help out. I'm taking a break, of sorts, from Wikipedia over the weekend, but I will look at it early next week. -- Gogo Dodo 03:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: Very strange that CBS would delete the page. I think a reasonable source would be the Internet Wayback Machine as per the link on the Borneo article. If you have the DVD set, you could also use that as a reference. Sorry about not helping. Things have been busier than I have anticipated, so I haven't had the time to help you. -- Gogo Dodo 06:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found a bit of time and I converted everything to table format, though left all the ages and home towns empty. Hopefully that helps out a little. I'll try and find some time to copy and paste those items in. One thing that you might consider is to remove the individual references for each player as I think that list is going to become way too long and end up dominating the article. Instead, perhaps a single reference link to the season's bio page or season page might work out better. -- Gogo Dodo 21:12, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re your messages: I looked at some of your FLs and I see what you mean. The scrolling box with List of World Tag Team Champions (WWE) looks pretty good. I'm not sure about that last edit I did where I linked the seasons all the time. I know you are only supposed to link once, but it just looked really odd to me when you clicked the sort toggles that the links were not available and just strewn about wherever the sort made them land. I made that a seperate edit from the sort cleanup, so you can revert that. -- Gogo Dodo 23:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. I went ahead and duplicated the city links again for the same reason as the season links. Are you sure the External Links section is necessary? Seems better off leaving that to the season article. I will work on the redirected links for the hometowns. I don't use AWB, but perhaps a search/replace will do most of the grunt work for me. -- Gogo Dodo 22:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All done. There might be a few links where the actual article doesn't follow the City, State convention, but the majority should bypass the redirect. -- Gogo Dodo 23:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. I made a few changes, but nothing major. -- Gogo Dodo 03:46, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good plan. It's your article, you can move and nominate it. =) Drop me a note when you get it nominated and I'll try to jump in on fixing whatever objections anybody has. -- Gogo Dodo 03:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I conquer, I was just about to say he always leaves hideen messages explaining why his stuff should "stay". Not only does he edit with really poor grammar, but he doesn't even know what he's talking about, like at Frank Grimes. Ah well, I'm actually thinking we give it a few days before reporting, certainly if he has another day tomorrow. On a side note, I got a free use image of Billy West, I couldn;t believe my luck, it was just there. But now if TMcC does become FA we won;t have to worry about not having a free use image. And although I'd prefer a free use image of Hartman, but that will never ever happen, so as he was afected by McClure, West is just as good. Gran² 19:47, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pretty loose connection yeah, (i'd have prefered Hartman, McClure or Donahue) but it'll do, it has some relevance, so I'm happy. Gran² 19:56, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good good, he is getting pretty irritating now. Gran² 17:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I really appreciate it. -- Oakster  Talk  14:43, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not to turn this into a competition or anything, but I've been working on a list of my own (currently incomplete); it might be a bit too detailed for this sort of thing though, while Oakster's provides a better overview of the whole championship landscape. I'd support whatever the community decides. --MarcK 14:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, Oakster's is probably better for this purpose. I say we add some references to it, make the article and put it up for FL right away. --MarcK 19:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: I've cleaned up the mess. -- Gogo Dodo 20:19, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have enough sourced information about each episode to further the article. You're guessing the order, plot, some of the names, etc. It's fine if you say "Person X will write "episode Y", or "Person Z has hinted theseason premiere will haveactor Q and actor R guest starring", as long as you're sourcing. But as I said, we don't know enough about season 19 to make a table yet. Will ^(talk) 12:50, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't even find them in the copyright database. You'd do well to actually link to the registration details instead of saying the registration number. Will ^(talk) 12:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're still guessing the order. Production code=/=order the episodes are in. Will ^(talk) 13:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. Just as long as they're sourced. Will ^(talk) 13:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've been ignoring the debates on that page, but since you've brought it to my attention, I may have to protect the article. Also, I created the page at the current title for a reason, and I do not agree that it should change. -- Earl Andrew - talk 00:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its a tough one, I was kind of actually hoping he would rejester for an account. But the sock puppet reporting place seems to be the best place for it at the moment. Gran² 17:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you refran from reverting several editors revisions as vandalism when there were multiple valid edits in it. — Moe ε 03:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up. the sectiosn you removed from the Benoit article about the "Welfare check" and "The police are not searching for any suspects outside of the house, as the instruments of death were located on scene." is from this ABC News Article, especially from this paragraph:

Pope said "the instruments of death were located on scene," but he would not specify what those instruments are or where in the house the bodies were found. Pope added the department is "not actively searching for any suspects outside of the house."' SirFozzie 03:40, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, I've put the death section of Nancy Daus' article back under her personal life section. Personal life, death, and sections about careers after wrestling go below all the information about wrestling (including wrestlers managed) per Good Articles such as Rena Mero, Nora Greenwald, and CM Punk. Thanks. Nikki311 15:12, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One thing seems certain, Daus was not murdered on the 25th. You are correct that we shouldn't speculate about her actually being killed on the 23th until something official comes out, but we also shouldn't give the incorrect date, either. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 15:24, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I chnaged it to "c. June 25th, 2007" to show that it was around the 25th. You are indeed right that we should wait for more official announcements from the coroner, etc, before changing it to something more firm. Cheers. (BTW, I commend you for working to keep sanity on these articles during such a heated time). youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 15:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 15:42, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take care of it, too. Also, check your userpage. Congratulations. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 15:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like he strangled her on Saturday, smothered his son on Sunday, and hanged himself on Monday. [2] I'm waiting for a "real" news source to report, though. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 16:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The HHOF official website, doesn't list Messier, Francis, Stevens, MacInnis and Gregory as Honorees. Let's be patient, though it's certain they'll be inducted in November. It'a accuracy that counts. GoodDay 15:06, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To my knowledge, the foundation itself won't contact any ISP or anything. But you are free to do so yourself. As I said, the pattern is pretty obvious so just revert edits on sight. Welcome to the world of wikipedia... Sasquatch t|c 17:56, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, first rule of Wikipedia is that there will always be vandals. At least this gives you something to do everyday. You can also ask nicely over at Wikipedia:Abuse reports to see if they'll help. Again, this is not a foundation run thing but run by other editors. Sasquatch t|c 18:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to Scorpion's comment on my talk page, hmph, I've been out all morning so missed today's spate of vandalism. He's been busy. I keep reporting the IP addresses at WP:AIV, and adding them to the abuse report, but don't know what good it's doing. One thing that frustrates me about this are the {{whois|British Telecom}} messages, saying to report offending users, but not seeing any action on the abuse report. I guess there aren't enough investigators. I contacted one, but haven't yet received a response. And my initial report is still listed as a new alert, even though it's been there a week. It may take a while to get this resolved. I guess we could contact BT directly, but I'd feel better about that if I were an actual admin, not a random contributor. -FeralDruid 22:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know its a bit selfish, but could we change the Cape Feare request to Homer's Phobia? I mean, Maitch said it was a better example of an episode page, and I haven't even seen him in ages. But anyway, as I said, its a bit selfish, and its up to you. And on the subject of the HMV, i tend to think of all of his edits as funny, and he certainly dislikes me! Gran² 19:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have done as best you can, I gave it a quick clean up, but I couldn't think of anything else right now. Gran² 06:19, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I added some information that you have removed a couple of times regarding Dan Jordan singing for Homer and Barney. Someone else has asked that it gets put back, but (like me) doesn't want an edit war. Could you please go over to the discussion page and justify why it was removed (I for one would like to know how information that I gathered straight from the source classifies as OR)

Thanks StephenBuxton 09:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• SROAOF - 16-17
• BTGenius - 18
• H's O - 19
• TNDLH - 20
• BTGeneral - 21
• ML - 22
• TCOTS - 23
• TTH - 24
• LOTFL - 25
• HNO - 26
• TCOW - 27
• KGB - 28-29
• SEE - 30-31

There you go. Gran² 21:29, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, it'll make GA after release, but FA will be a good five months or so. There's no way it'll get there before the DVD is released, there'll be so much new info from that, DVD commentary(ies), documentaries and deleted scenes, so we'll need to harvest that. Plus its got a great chance of at least being nominated for some awards. Besides, it pretty much agreed that film articles don't make FA for a good while after their release. I mean look at Casino Royale, it failed its FAC three times. Although it will be eventually, I guarantee.

I believe we just need to make List of World Wrestling Entertainment championships using Oakster's suggestion, get that to FL, and then push it all towards FT. --MarcK 00:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why this page couldn't be considered as a list, despite the name. Two other FL awards lists don't have "List of" in their names. The amount of prose at the start isn't that unusual these days. The prose could do with a copy edit, and you'll need to ensure it is well sourced. There are a lot of NHL trophies! Regards, Colin°^Talk 14:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the matter of List of one-time characters from The Simpsons, you'll probably be pleased to know that Tregosmeth has been blocked, for having a username too close to (ahem) another user. —tregoweth (talk) 18:50, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know, I saw a split before you told me, and I've removed the TV and IMDb ratings already, I'll get to work on the refs... I really wish he would have actually told us first, because it isn't ready... Ah well. Gran² 06:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should let it go through, at least then can get some more comments from other people, better than a PR. And at least if it crashes and burns, we won;t get the blame for it! Gran² 06:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I knew something was up with that, he came up purple on my watchlist and I was I hadn't clicked the link. Maybe he's run out of possible IPs and has to repeat old ones. And YOMT is looking much much better now, I'll try and find some more cult refs. I think we need some more critical reviews as well, I did a quick search earlier but couldn't find anything. Also no doubt someone will feel the need to complain about the prose, so I would submit I think we should submit it to WP:LOCE. Gran² 18:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope sorry, I would upload one of them, but they arn't free use. They both are "All Rights Reserved", and so cannot be used. It doesn't look [3] like there are any free use images of Brooks on Flickr. I mailed the uploader of the first one a while ago actually, but they still haven't changed the license. Gran² 06:03, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, for the late reply. I really don't have much time for Wikipedia right now and I'm going on vacation tomorrow. I think it is fine to include the debacle surrounding Some Enchanted Evening, since it is relevant for how the season turned out. I do believe that the Emmy database is a valid source. We don't have to always link to the sources. I can't help you with You Only Move Twice. --Maitch 08:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, you accused me of fabricating the fact that Homer became friends with Larry because he admired his laziness. Then the third time, you reverted my edit calling it an unneeded detail, which means that you've accepted it as a fact. It's ironic you're referring to me as a liar when you're the one who cannot give a concise and consistent reason for reverting my edits.--Folksong 21:39, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The climax of the plot was when Larry met Homer, and unfortunately, there is nothing in the article explaining why they became friends. One well-sourced sentence takes nothing away from the brevity of the article. If you could find a better way to explain it, you're welcome to, but an important detail like that should not be overlooked.--Folksong 23:52, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In an act of good faith, I read over the script, highlighted the sections and posted them on your talk page so you could see my rationale. But, you deleted it without reply and still continue to falsify accusations against me. I also replied to your post on my talk page. Cheers, --Folksong 20:14, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, if someone reverted them, re-revert them back and cite WP:MoS. Until then, I have little choice to oppose the nomination. Stnad by your ground. I'll back you up. :-) — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:10, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, who is specifically reverting the changes? I don't have time to go through all of the edits, btu if they are in the wrong, I'll be happy to rip them a new one. — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]