An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is FlashForward (season 1). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FlashForward (season 1). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:19, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You have done a nice job on the new The Good Wife (season 1) page. I was interested in the UK ratings table that you added, but I am in the US so I am unfamiliar with some things. Would it be possible to add a sentence or two above the table as an explanation? For example, the show airs on two networks. Are these available to different parts of the country? Different cable systems? Or is it possible that total viewers counts people who watched the show twice on 2 channels? What do you mean by ratings for Channel 4+1? Is that the "live ratings plus one day"? (Are these be distinguished differently in the table?) Hope you don't mind the questions. I'm just curious, and I am sure many others are. Thanks! --Logical Fuzz (talk) 14:25, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for the compliment. I'll add a short explanation above the ratings table to help non-UK residents understand better. Channel 4 is like NBC; it is a major network that everyone with a TV automatically gets, and More4 is like USA Network; it is a cable channel that all cable providers provide. By Channel 4+1, I am referring to the Channel 4+1 which is a timeshift of Channel 4. Once again, thanks for the compliment and the feedback :). Tommyjgrimshaw (talk) 15:18, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have re-added the ratings for the UK and France to The Mentalist (season 2), see the rational for removal from Grk1011 and engage, thanks. _Xeworlebi ^(t•c) 16:08, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, please see the rationale for removal. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 17:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. I saw the UK ratings had been removed and just rea-dded them without looking. I do think UK ratings and other international ratings are important. TV By the Numbers even reports the daily UK ratings now too, and international ratings and sales do affect a show's chance of renewal. Maybe, once the season concludes in the UK, I can add a sentence to the article saying how much the season averaged in the UK... Tommyjgrimshaw (talk) 17:13, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That would be fine, we just don't need a breakdown as descriptive as the US ratings since the UK is not the shows main market. The show is broadcast in 40+ countries and the UK is no more important than any of the other import markets just because information exists. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 17:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just a note to say thanks for adding UK ratings to the Glee episode articles, but please remember that when you do so, especially if you're changing references that are already cited, you must always specify a reliable source for verification. Thank you. Frickative 17:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just noticed that the UK ratings you have added to List of NCIS: Los Angeles episodes come from Google sites.[1] As a user contributed site, and one that you edit,[2] this is both a self published source and a circular reference. This clearly makes this site unreliable as a source and it can not be used as a reference. If you think you can justify use of the source, please comment at Talk:List of NCIS: Los Angeles episodes#UK ratings. Thank you. --AussieLegend (talk) 22:13, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Private Practice (season 1) has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Calmer Waters 14:48, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to List of Private Practice episodes, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Mlpearc MESSAGE 16:24, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to List of NCIS: Los Angeles episodes. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. As I indicated to you on 30 March 2010, Google sites is not a reliable source and as you edit it, it is a self-published source and so can not be used as a reference. Please do not use it as a reference again. AussieLegend (talk) 17:52, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to The Good Wife (season 1) has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Logical Fuzz (talk) 22:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to List of Rizzoli & Isles episodes has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. When you create summaries such as these, you must put them in your own words. Also, tv.com, IMDB and SpoilerTV are typically not considered reliable sources. KnownAlias contact 17:44, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this message is to let you know about disambiguation links you've recently created. A link to a disambiguation page is almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

Glee: The Music, Volume 7 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

was linked to ABC, Control, Someone Like You

Any suggestions for improving this automated tool are welcome. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:21, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tommy. I just wanted to applaud you for your work on adding the ratings for Celebrity Juice Episodes. I just have qualms about the fact that the grids seem a bit bloated right now with all the columns (two episode numbers for example) and it's making the page a bit cramped. Could we put the ratings into a special seperate section perhaps? Also there are no ratings for Series 1 . I am just trying to balance the page and make it easier o the eye, but I appreciate your work. Hope you don't mind my suggestion. Thanks!66.130.78.67 (talk) 23:46, 30 August 2012 (UTC)samusek2[reply]

Hi. Thanks for the feedback. I noticed that with the tables too, although I am unsure of what layout would be best or meet Wikipedia's layout guidelines the most adequately. As for series 1, BARB has no ratings for the show, as for every week, it wasn't one of the top 10 most watched programmes on ITV2, and therefore not published on BARB. Thanks again! Tommyjgrimshaw (talk) 23:51, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]