Dear Jasonbres: welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:

• Wikipedia:Introduction
• Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• Frequently Asked Questions
  • How do you edit a page?
  • How do you revert to a previous version of a page?
  • What about copyrights?
• Community Portal

Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user talk (discussion) page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. A third option is to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator.

One last bit of advice: please sign any discussion comment with four tildes (~~~~). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD!   -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 01:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jason: I've removed the "alternate future" occupations you added to several character infoboxes for Heroes. This sort of information isn't really needed in the 'box, especially since we have no idea how "stable" the possible futures are. If group consensus is in favour of such a change, I won't object, but I think you should probably discuss it first. Thoughts? --Ckatz^chat_spy 21:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Pushing Daisies logo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 17:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do not create new articles about television episodes unless you can assert notability through reliable sources. There is no getting around it. TTN 19:04, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you disagree with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines then I suggest you go to the talk pages of those guidelines. -- Ned Scott 01:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All of the character articles and episode articles (except for the first episode) have been nominated for deletion. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Misc Pushing Daisies articles. -- Ned Scott 02:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats what fans call it and the creator never said the "Pushing Daisies time." Obviously it is the Pushing Daisies time. Daisyverse is just a more specific word that fans call it. Look at the pushing daisies talk page.--Mugatu3333 (talk) 19:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We seriously need to do something about this guy and his dumb edits.--Hailey 02:41, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Which "guy" and "edits" are you referring to? -- Jasonbres (talk)

User:66.245.195.50, the "Cartoon All-Stars 2000s" guy!--Hailey 03:05, 7 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hailey C. Shannon (talk • contribs)

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information about living persons, especially if controversial, to any page on Wikipedia, as you did to Saturday Night Live season 33. Ward3001 (talk) 04:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On another topic, you really shouldn't have removed the sketches. ----DanTD (talk) 16:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Lindsay Lohan. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 19:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added the material about the title reference back. I don't think your comment

You know what? I don't think we should assume what the title is referring to until we listen to the commentary on the DVD.

makes much sense; (1) what's known publicly about the plot makes it completely obvious that the Othello reference is intentional; (2) the inference that the 1955 film is also being referenced is no less conjectural than a dozen similar statements made about other episode titles; and (3) the notion that we must wait for a DVD commentary to divine the intention of a title seems to me to defy common sense. Let me know if and why you disagree.

Randompeeler (talk) 04:05, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a free image under Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 105 of the US Code. The work is in the public domain because it is a work of the United States Federal Government. (taken by a federal gov. employee for federal government buisness). The image comes directly from the White House's website. Nrswanson (talk) 18:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop pestering me I can put anything I want on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.47.88.195 (talk) 09:57, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No you can't. That's called vandalism, stupid. - Jasonbres (talk) 13:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked for a period of 24 hours for edit warring on Saturday Night Live (Season 34). It is essential that you are more careful to discuss controversial changes with the user in question, rather than simply revert them repeatedly: this applies even if you think or know you are correct. Edit warring helps nobody, and actually harms the page in question, and the encyclopedia. To contest this block please place {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Tiptoety ^talk 22:59, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the standard format for listing stars is alphabetical. Please don't just revert against this long-standing custom; if you do not agree with it, the better option is to open a discussion through the television project. Thanks. --Ckatz^chat_spy 08:13, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But everyone's going to think that Kristin is the star if it's written that way. Look at the credits to Ugly Betty, Futurama, and The Simpsons. Also look at the film credits. Those things have very clear cut stars as well. - Jasonbres (talk) 14:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise for butting in, but putting them in alphabetical order is just ridiculous. It should be kept in the way they appear in the opening credits, and I am not aware of any other show on wikipedia that has its cast displayed in alphabetical order. - Loveem 16:22, 22 September 2008 (BST)

Be careful with the name-calling as you did here. Just a friendly reminder. I also happen to agree with Levineps adding Affleck's parody of Keith Olbermann. Please read the edit again; it doesn't say that Affleck hosted the show. If it had said that I would agree with you. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 15:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliable cite for a new album you can add to the article? Barring one, or a reply here, we'll have to remove it until such arrives. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 04:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And you do. I just got to you before you got to it. Sorry! — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 04:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you going to build an album page at this time, or wait for more information? I'll be more than happy to create it, either in the articlespace or my userspace (is there isn't enough info yet). Say? — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 04:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather wait for more info, including the track listing. - Jasonbres (talk) 04:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine with me. In the interim (probably tomorrow), I'll store a work-in-progress at User:pd_THOR/Bo Burnham (album). — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 04:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mate

Can you please stop including spoiler information in the cast list. You seem to have a strange idea of what a spoiler is. It means it gives away information that is not immediately obvious to a new viewer to the series. Obviously if you have watched all the episodes then it is not a spoiler. But, in that case, what would be? Ask yourself: do you think it is reasonable that somebody, after watching the 1st episode of pushing daisies, is told that Lily is Chuck's aunt? If not, then do not put it in the cast list. If you don't agree with this then please post your reasoning on the discussion page before reverting. Thank you

I listed Lily as Vivian's sister. Are you satisfied? - Jasonbres (talk) 22:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Please do not remove information like you did with this edit just because you think it spoils the plot. Wikipedia has a strict guideline for these things, see Wikipedia:Spoiler. It does not matter, if the movie has been released already, just if the information is verifiable. You might not know this, but the movie has been leaked on the internet and while I personally did not download it, it is safe to assume that many many people did so and thus already have access to information you do not possess. Also, you need to consider that movies are given out in advance to journalists and magazines, just check how many reports on the movie's plot already exist at Google News. IGN for example is a reliable source. So please refrain from removing information that might spoil the plot - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a TV guide, our goal is completeness of information. Regards SoWhy 15:09, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please quit editing this information on his page, his show's page, or the page on prop comedy. Demetri Martin uses props in many of his stand up routines. This doesn't mean that is all he does, but her certainly uses props more than standard stand-up comedians. Describing him as a stand up and prop comedian does nothing to take away from any of the three articles. As a matter of fact, it only adds to them. Please quit editing the pages just because you do not believe it belongs there. When Demetri Martin stops using props in his comedy, maybe it would make sense to remove that information. FreddyPickle (talk) 23:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since when? I've only seen him use drawings and musical instruments, but those aren't really props. Plus, Demetri has never once labelled himself as a prop comic. Carrot Top on the other hand IS definitely a prop comic. And a very s****y one at that, too. - Jasonbres (talk) 23:36, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The pen, the pad, the bottles, the instruments.....these are all props. As I stated above, he may not use as many props as Carrot Top or Gallagher, but he certainly uses more props than Sam Kennison, Artie Lange, Jerry Seinfeld or Tracy Morgan. One term is not exclusive to the other. He can be both a stand up and a prop comedian. Steve Martin is a good example of this. FreddyPickle (talk) 03:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit summary here really isn't appropriate at all. Your edit is correct (because adding the date is original research), but I would except better conduct from a longer term editor such as yourself. Please remember to assume good faith, and not bite the newbies. Prodego ^talk 04:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at some of your other edit summaries, there are quite a few other issues going on, which I will try to address concisely:

• (Nuh-uhh-uhh, no spoily-woilys.)

"It is not acceptable to delete information from an article because you think it spoils the plot"^[1]

• Undid revision 274604156 by 164.107.143.110 (talk) GO FUCK YOURSELF!

Obviously totally unacceptable under WP:AGF, WP:BITE, WP:NPA...

• No need for wikilinking coz they don't have articles.

"In general, red links should not be removed from articles if they link to something that could plausibly sustain an article."^[2]

Please make sure you actually understand what you are doing before undoing others edits. It makes things difficult for everyone. If you aren't sure about something, ask for outside input, perhaps on a talk page, don't just act. Prodego ^talk 04:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're a regular here and fine as an editor, so this is not a criticism, just a friendly reminder. It's true that a warrant was issued for her, but remember that "the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". It needs a reliable source. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 01:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Ocean's Three and a Half. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Cirt (talk) 00:19, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Phoenix (band) is French, although I agree it is not notable. Ward3001 (talk) 18:28, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. - Jasonbres (talk) 18:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FoxFlash is often innacurate (e.g., in several releases they tend to say "Lila" rather than "Tabitha") whenever revealing new information about a series or episode. So your saying that your YouTube video and your source is (somehow) more correct than my YouTube video and my source. Please explain your rational - Arnett himself says here "Ennis rhymes with a male body part". I saw a YouTube video as well saying Happy's name is spelt with two "m"s - plus, how they pronounced it at the 09' WonderCon. Your not making sense. But you still seem to think that your right with everything. Please explain. -- A ^talk/_contribs 21:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, nevermind. I see that the video you've cited is a more recent one, unlike the one I watched. I hadn't even bothered to look at the source you've added. My sincere apologies. -- A ^talk/_contribs 21:37, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay, we all make mistakes. - Jasonbres (talk) 21:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove information from articles, as you did to Pushing Daisies. Wikipedia is not censored, and content is not removed even if some believe it to be contentious. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page to reach consensus rather than continuing to remove the disputed material. You also have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide the images that you may find offensive. Thank you. Also, please see Wikipedia:Spoiler for policy reasons why your edits have been reverted. TheRealFennShysa (talk) 16:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What am I supposed to do then? I'm in a no-win situation here! - Jasonbres (talk) 21:05, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Family Guy Star Wars has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. KMFDM FAN ^(talk!) 09:52, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to figure out the right deletion format to use. KMFDM FAN ^(talk!) 09:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jason. I'd like to say I'm sorry. I know we have had our editing disagreements in the past and I wanted to apologize. I realize now that we're both just attempting to better the quality of Wikipedia. I'd also like to thank you for both watching and changing the List of Seth MacFarlane's Cavalcade of Cartoon Comedy episodes page to correctly fit with the MOS. Once again, I apologize and thank you. I hope we can continue to work together in the future. Happy editing. --HELLØ ŦHERE 01:01, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unless the divorce has been finalized, Jon and Kate Gosselin are still married and cannot have any denotation of divorced or "ex" in the articles. Once the divorce has officially gone through, then it can be changed. Thanks. --13² 19:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioning this as I see it has been brought up before on your talk page - please use edit summaries for their intended purpose. Summaries such as [1] are unhelpful and far from civil. Thanks. Frickative 18:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. I just get so sick and tired of people spelling her name wrong. - Jasonbres (talk) 18:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Apologies too for spelling it wrong in the first place. I'll copy-edit more carefully in future. While I'm here, I've been meaning to say for a while, great work on maintaining all the Glee articles :) Frickative 19:07, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sit Down Shut Up logo 2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Skier Dude (talk) 06:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey JasonBres! I was just wondering if you've noticed what is going on with the page for the new series of SNL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Live_(season_35)). A user named Compfunk has deleted all the notes next to the list of episodes, but only that page and not the previous seasons. He does not think it is necessary. He seems to have strong reservations. What are your thoughts. Could you look at the page and his edits and maybe discuss it with him? 65.92.21.111 (talk) 20:28, 4 December 2009 (UTC)SAMUSEK2[reply]

A proposal has been created for WikiProject Saturday Night Live. Please leave comments, and consider joining as a potential project member.Mainly.generic (talk) 13:52, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is From Bed to Worse. 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/From Bed to Worse. 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) 01:10, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not just copy and paste plot summaries from Fox. It is a copyright violation. Thank you, CTJF83 chat 22:10, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition 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. Theleftorium 20:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You completely reverted my edit to Loretta Brown. I made numerous grammatical corrections that were necassary. I’m hoping that wasn’t your intention. Please be more careful next time. If there’s something I’m missing, feel free to let me know here. Thank you. Geeky Randy (talk) 05:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's not Loretta. It's just some random black girl with a similar hairstyle. - Jasonbres (talk) 13:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, feel free to reply to my talk page since there might be a chance I won't get your reply when you respond on your talk page. Please refer to WP:CK for the disagreement and WP:NEU might be beneficial too. I'm allowing one week for a citation that it is Loretta, and if no verifiable source(s) surface that say it is her, it'll be taken down and not put back up. Unless you can find a screen shot to prove it's not her or some other kind of verifiable source, then you can hang tight for a week until I can verify it. In accordance with WP:Citation needed, we can allow a window of time for this to be proven/disproven—and in this case it's relevant because cartoons do have these kind of continuity errors. An example would be Francis Griffin and Sarah Bennett (from "I Am Peter, Hear Me Roar") both appear in "Perfect Castaway" as background characters with no lines, despite already being established characters in episodes prior. You can also see Larry Burns from The Simpsons for an example on another show. Also, there seems to be no proof that the events in "April in Quahog" immediately follow "Gone With the Wind". Thank you for not completely reverting my edit like last time. Geeky Randy (talk) 01:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You'll be happy to know I've confirmed something you've edited as correct; when you posted that the U2 version of One was used in Laryngitis, and someone later removed that information (prompting you to remove it from the episode page, I'm sure), I went today to confirm it a week to the episode's air date. I located this confirming it. It's another Wiki, so I've made a point to presume that the other Wiki (dedicated to Glee, interestingly) has researched this and if a better source is needed someone else will provide it...so thanks for that edit and I will now defend it myself. =) CycloneGU (talk) 13:03, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cyclone, (and Jason, I hope you don't mine me replying on your talk page - apologies if so!) thank you for trying to source the information. If you look at the reliable source and verifiability guidelines, however, they both note that open wikis like the Glee Wikia are considered self-published sources that shouldn't be used on Wikipedia. From my experience, the standards external wikis use for inclusion are usually far less stringent than Wikipedia itself, and they often include speculation and outright rumour. It may well transpire in the end that it is the U2 version they're performing, and that's fine, but we can't say so until we have a suitably reliable source confirming it. The most recent reliable source I've found discussing it is this one, which notes that five days ago, no one connected with the show would give an official comment on whether it's the U2 version or not. So we really need something more solid than the word of a fansite wiki to counter that. Frickative 13:56, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Frickative, I've placed a note on your talk page. I've changed my source to the FOX site specifically; echoing my remark at your page, it's hilarious that the only thing we're disagreeing about is who wrote and sang ONE song. *LOL* CycloneGU (talk) 14:20, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[Outdent] You might be interested in the discussion here, particularly the latter part.

Since it sounds like you haven't visited my talk page yet - where I specifically talk about the Glee Music confirmation, and it's also here...

I contacted FOX by e-mail yesterday directly from the main Web page (basically I went to www.fox.com) and inquired about it. While the second message was a little bit on the rude side in terms of how it came across (whether intended or not, but what do I know since FOX News is itself rude and unbalanced), a specific quote from the reply in question was, "The U2-written song was covered" (yes, they bolded it). I don't care whether they publish it or not; this is a good enough confirmation for me since we can't use Wikis as sources for obvious reasons. We just don't have a good way of verifying personal research on Wikipedia.

If you are still not satisfied with this explanation, I challenge you to use the Ask FOX feature and get the same confirmation. CycloneGU (talk) 15:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to sign my last comment, so I've put a sig on it based on my edit time.

I noticed the last edit and I agree my detail addon was unneeded there, so I won't challenge that removal. It just seemed silly to me that in the week preceeding a show that was taped over two months ago, we were challenging every source out there because the newspapers and reporters never cover this thing. *LOL* I had a discussion at length about "The Lady Is A Tramp" with Frickative as well since there are other versions of that not noted as covers...but I did not challenge the information specifically because (a) they are likely covers NEway, (b) the show uses show tunes frequently. No offense was meant in any of this, BTW, and thanks for doing the second step that I did as well. =) CycloneGU (talk) 23:51, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated The other guy from Wham (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:01, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Krusty Gets Kancelled. 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. -- Cirt (talk) 18:41, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Can you please tell me how adding that "Grilled Cheesus" is a religion-based episode is considered too much information? If you take a look at featured article Glee (season 1), you will see that the episode summary contain much, much more information than any of the ones in Glee (season 2). Thank you. Yvesnimmo (talk) 00:16, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It just makes the synopsis way too long. - Jasonbres (talk) 00:24, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly not, if the Glee (season 1) article has passed rigorous reviewing to become an example of one of the best works on the English Wikipedia. I don't know of any rule that defines "too long" for episode summaries, or prohibits them. Yvesnimmo (talk) 00:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant guideline here is WP:MOSTV, which states that plot summaries in tables should be 100-200 words, or 350 for complicated storylines. It's currently 28 words, and was 45 - definitely not way too long. Frickative 01:05, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right. I do not think it was too long. The summary will get changed anyway—very likely completely rewritten—after the episode airs to encompass more precisely the plot of the episode, and at that point, it will be even longer. Yvesnimmo (talk) 01:11, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove sources from articles. Sources don't expire; things like participants in an episode must be sourced. A statement of "confirmed on air" is not a source. Please read WP:Citing sources and WP:Reliable sources for additional information. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:02, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not if the episode already aired. Then references are no longer necessary. It's been that way for years on these SNL season pages. - Jasonbres (talk) 16:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the way it's done on Wikipedia; WP:Verifiability! If you remove a source, anyone can remove the people from the episodes as being unsourced. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:10, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The previous SNL seasons have no references. So do you want us to find archival evidence that THOSE hosts and musical guests appeared on the show? Of course not. It's a pain to do so. - Jasonbres (talk) 16:31, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Also, the cameos and musical performances are also unsourced. Ergo, everyone agrees that this is correct information. - Jasonbres (talk) 16:35, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Nick Swardson's Pretend Time has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Wikipedia isn't a crystal ball.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 03:23, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to List of songs in Glee (season 2). Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Yves (talk) 15:21, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

   Hi there. I would like to ask you to please stop adding original research to Wikipedia like you did here; it is not allowed, as is WP:SYNTH. Thank you. Yves (talk) 15:21, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How can you possibly listen to "Sweet Transvestite" and say that's NOT Amber? - Jasonbres (talk) 15:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is still original research. Maybe it is someone with a remarkably similar voice that has never been on the show before. Trust me, I have been listening to the song for a week now, and I know it is Riley, but the truth does not go on Wikipedia over verifiability. Yves (talk) 17:32, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted some of your good faith edits to List of songs in Glee (season 2): this edit is using a blog as a source and this one still doesn't mention Riley's performance of "Sweet Transvestite". It may be obvious, yes, but it does not directly state it without requiring WP:SYNTH. And what makes BroadwayWorld a reliable website? Yves (talk) 14:40, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I would just like to remind you to read, if you haven't done so, or reread, if you have, WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. Your contributions are certainly appreciated in good faith, but unfortunately, we cannot accept either of these things on Wikipedia. Hope you understand. Yves (talk) 03:42, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to add that, when adding content, to never revert back to a previous revision if there are edits in between. Your edit, for example, reverted constructive edits like the addition a performer, the addition of a two-column reference list, and the omission of unsourced performers per a request on the talk page. Please do not add to Wikipedia like this. Thank you. Yves (talk) 03:55, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Legitimate question: do you not understand Wikipedia's policies on verification? And providing reliable sources? Yves (talk) 01:30, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's NOT original research!! The episode already aired! THAT'S the source! - Jasonbres (talk) 03:14, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only the primary source, which is not helpful. Yves (talk) 18:17, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jason, just alerting you to a slight problem at Glee (season 2). With this edit you've added a new title for episode 8, but seemingly forgotten to include the actual reference :) This has prompted a none too clever bot to substitute in a 1997 review of Evita?!. I've checked MSN TV but can't see the title listed there, so perhaps you'd like to add it back in with whatever source you'd found? Cheers. Frickative 14:52, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ETA - just noticed that the TV Guide source previously in use has updated the page to reflect the "Furt" title, so nothing to change now! Frickative 15:03, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the references provided before you revert any changes, including this. An edit like that is not appreciated. If you click the link, you will see that it has indeed been released on the ninth of November. Yves (talk) 22:57, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to List of songs in Glee (season 2). Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Yves (talk) 22:58, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I request that you please take the time and read the above article on original research and what it is. This is not an assumption of bad faith, but this has been a recurring issue, and I think you need to be aware of that to improve your skills as a Wikipedian. Thanks. Yves (talk) 22:58, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to Glee (season 2). Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Yves (talk) 19:56, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please stop with the original research. Yves (talk) 19:56, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for taking the time to ensure that we have proper sources for content about Winnie the Pooh (film). However, regarding this change, you reverted a lot of valid changes as well. I assume you only meant to revert the changes to the cast list, as all the other changes look good, AFAICT. Please restore the other changes. --Mepolypse (talk) 20:21, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and keep up the good work. --Mepolypse (talk) 20:48, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. - Jasonbres (talk) 00:57, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know how frustrating it is to know something is right, yet not be allowed to include it in the article. Before Journey aired, I had read on blogs from people who had physically attended the taping and scanned copies of the programs they'd received. Based on those blogs, I insisted that the information was valid as they actually got the info from the event and shared it with everyone. It however was considered "original research" or "invalid source" (because it was a blog). The big one for me was knowing who all of the judges were, including Rod Remington, but it wasn't allowed to add his name to the article because it wasn't properly sourced. Of course, he appeared in the episode itself as a judge, and only then did I get to finally add it to the article and it stuck.

Similarly, I found the "Glee Volume 4" article on tommy2.net which has been very accurate with its listings for Glee. They even included the album cover! Unfortunately, tommy2.net is still marked as an invalid source and therefore the page was not created until Amazon and iTunes caught up and released pre-order pages for it. I fought for this one as well in favour of tommy2.net because of its history, but to no avail.

Just be careful to only add anything that is properly sourced. Even Jimbo Wales has an article that he and those who know him can't add certain information to, and a discussion came up once as to whether his daughter in fact existed because the source was in question. *LOL* CycloneGU (talk) 16:34, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jasonbres, you really, really need to stop with the original research. This is becoming a regular problem with you. Yves (talk) 19:50, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I accidentally changed that page but I forgot to click on preview button. I want to chat with you few moments about Amy Adams. I know she engaged Darren Le Gallo in 2001. But I forgotten that name of that guy who's married her that I have changed. Did you know what is the name of that guy have married Amy Adams that I've changed? --AndyTheCop (talk) 18:05, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now I remember that name, I got it, his name is Jonas Andromeda.

Maybe I thought Jonas Andromeda is a new boyfriend of Amy Adams. She engaged him on January 14, 2011. Now I know she hasn't married yet. --AndyTheCop (talk) 19:17, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When Amy Adams engaged her new boyfriend, Jonas Andromeda on January 14, 2011, her daughter Aviana Olea Le Gallo might be renamed to Aviana Olea Andromeda. --AndyTheCop (talk) 20:17, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where's your source? - Jasonbres (talk) 20:34, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just looking for it. --AndyTheCop (talk) 02:16, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, it's all bullshit you pulled outta your ass, right? - Jasonbres (talk) 02:26, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No. As I said I have to looking for sources. If I found that source, I will add it to that page if it's true. If I found no source, I don't add it to that page. --AndyTheCop (talk) 05:25, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is simply not appropriate to put dummy text relating to events that haven't occurred yet into Wikipedia articles. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 03:22, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been doing it for years to save time and NOW you tell me it's a no-no?! - Jasonbres (talk) 03:25, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good find on the Fox press release as displayed by The Futon Critic, which calls the episode "Pot of Gold". ("Pot 'O Gold" looked so wrong. It still does, for that matter.) It meant for some last-minute scrambling to fix the Did You Know? entry, which was already in the queue when you made the necessary move, but it got done in time.

Since the "Pot of Gold" article is currently a "Did You Know?" entry on the Wikipedia main page, if another even more authoritative source turns up in the next 10+ hours with yet another rendering, please hold off further renaming until the next batch of DYKs are moved to the main page; we don't want to have the article become unavailable, even temporarily, while it's being featured there. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 13:57, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jason, there is enough conflicting information out there that I thought it best to remove your inclusion of episode 8 for the time being. These include:

• the information that Morrison has said he's directing episode 8 (he said it a month ago; is it still true?)
• the information that Overstreet is returning in episode 8 (also true according to Murphy)
• the episode is still being written (again, true according to Murphy)
• Harmony reappears in episode 8, which is apparently Sectionals: "She is sort of the Rachel of her school, and she's so amazing, and she will be competing against our groups," Murphy says. (zap2it's quote, from the 300th song interviews.)
• episodes 10 and 11 will be in January, and Samuel's character will first be seen in one of them (Murphy via zap2it and others)
• the Christmas episode is being done in December (true according to Ausiello and also The Futon Critic)
• the Christmas episode is the ninth episode (true according to The Futon Critic)
• it "looks like" Morrison is directing the Christmas episode (Ausiello again)

As you can see, the first and last two simply do not add up: someone's wrong here. And if we know that we're operating on partially bad information, it seems to me best to hold off until we get something better. According to a Lea Michele tweet, they finish episode 7 this week...or were going to until Naya Rivera came down sick. So episode 8 will have to start shooting soon...

If there had been an episode title included—reliably sourced, naturally—I'd probably have left it and cut out the Christmas info, but without that and with the new uncertainty about which episode Morrison was doing, there wasn't enough meat left.

Logic tells me that it's unlikely you'd have all the Christmas songs and all the Sectionals songs in a single episode: it's just not practical, especially if you want to feature Warblers, Harmony, and New Directions: the Christmas album has 12 songs on it, and you know they're going to feature four or five minimum. However, logic has a funny way of not always applying to Glee. And, of course, if episode 9 is the Christmas one, they certainly haven't finished writing it if episode 8 is also undone. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:22, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Pan Am (TV series), please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. The link you added was dead and the content you added subsequently removed. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Lhb1239 (talk) 20:16, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jasonbres, instead of a wholesale revert in "Extraordinary Merry Christmas", I should have deleted just the information that wasn't supported by the cited reference. I apologize. Thanks for restoring the Production sentence, minus Mayhew; it's important to have it. (Mayhew's living in Texas these days, according to his website, and has become a US citizen.) BlueMoonset (talk) 02:00, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay. I forgive you. - Jasonbres (talk) 02:02, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited List of Smash episodes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Mayer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:47, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jason, just wanted to let you know that I reversed my reversion and let stand your addition of "2Cellos" to the guest star list for "Michael". Fox is notoriously inaccurate (they omitted Grant Gustin from the episode's guest star list!), and the Production section has from the beginning mentioned their appearance. Since Sony/Columbia is Glee's label, they may have a better insight as to whether they are indeed treated like "guest artists", which ought to translate as guest stars... but it may not.

I think, however, that we have to give TV Guide and the Hollywood Reporter more weight than Amazon on "Human Nature" / "Nature Boy" for the present. Amazon has made mistakes before on song titles, and Hollywood Reporter generally confirms scoops from other sources before repeating information such as there being a mash-up, which they do state. I'm hoping we get more definitive statements soon confirming all ten songs; I'm sure there's going to be a lot released over the next ten days... BlueMoonset (talk) 02:55, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Characters of Glee, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Summer Nights (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Callbacks (Smash), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page On Air with Ryan Seacrest (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:45, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know you undid this edit I made in the infobox: [2]. I don't disagree with it, since I introduced the story and teleplay infobox parameters to the article in the first place. I just added the small text mentioning the Teleplay and Television Story just to make it more clear to the other readers. Teleplay and Story credits usually aren't credited to solely one person as is the case with Theresa Rebeck with this pilot episode. The term "Television Story" is generally used when the episode writer actually adapted the show from another work. Smash is actually adapted from a book, I believe. QuasyBoy 20:23, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I understand. - Jasonbres (talk) 20:41, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Check article title vs. first few words in lede. Zad68 (talk) 18:36, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How embarrasing. Thanks for telling me. I fixed it. - Jasonbres (talk) 18:38, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Once (musical), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Carney (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:11, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted Blake Andrew Johnson as a recurring. Please note IMDB is a reliable source as the SMASH imdb is manitained by the show staff. Also, if you need more proof of him being on episodes 3, 6, 7 $8 as a recurring and Principal as stated on his script, see the nbc website for the show http://www.nbc.com/smash/photos/enter-mr-dimaggio/9885#item=224316 . You can also check the article in Newsday about him http://long-island.newsday.com/things-to-do/local-4-year-old-model-now-an-actor-too-1.3538441 . thank you Ltlwmn2002 (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2012 (UTC)ltlwmn2002[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Glee (season 3), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rex Lee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:31, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:05, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 00:06, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:05, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jasonbres. You have new messages at Talk:Family Guy (season 10)#Season finale.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hearfourmewesique (talk) 17:52, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:03, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article The Half Hour has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't appear to meet the notability guideline for TV shows or the general notability guideline

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. – hysteria18 (talk) 18:48, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you provide a link proving your claim that we MUST use real words, like you stated on [[Glee (season 4}]]?. LiamNolan24 (talk) 02:35, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pitch Perfect, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don't Stop the Music (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:48, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jason, I like to have Glee articles up when there's real information in them, but not when the information is not only unsourced but inaccurate. Having noticed a number of inaccuracies in the unsourced production section of "Dynamic Duets", I'm going to have to revert your second attempt to start the article. It's a shame, since the episode will air in a week, but their are certain minimal standards that need to be maintained. If the same is true of "Thanksgiving", it too will have to revert to redirect status. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The First Christmas: The Story of the First Christmas Snow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page White Christmas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 17:21, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Glee, Actually (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Feliz Navidad

Thanksgiving (Glee) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Promises, Promises

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:24, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Crossroads Guitar Festival, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Booker T (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:23, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your source saying that Frozen will be a 2014 film is probably because they made a mistake in the release. You must think outside the box. (Thinking inside the box here would be assuming that the mention of 2014 was purposely that time in 2014; which would be almost 2015.) Georgia guy (talk) 17:29, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me where you got the idea that Disney Channel made a mistake on the press release? Give me a source to prove this. Keenan202 (talk) 18:47, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

https://twitter.com/nickandmore/status/426188049895026688 You may have noticed how the episode seems to overlap with an episode of Fish Hooks airing at the same time. - Jasonbres (talk) 18:49, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Frozen (2013 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Digital download (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Jimmy Fallon sketches, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Your Body (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you Jason Breslin from Phineas and Ferb Wiki? - EvilLair (talk) 05:52, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Yes, I am. :) - Jasonbres (talk) 12:13, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it due to some-one adding a 'citation needed' next to the "Shoichet also provides the singing voice of Twilight Sparkle." part. Asaraullo05 (talk) 03:25, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to tell you that in your contributing to Glee (season 3) and that the prom episode was called "Prom-asaurus" so that means I was right and you were wrong, saying that wasn't the episode! Entertainer91 (talk) 01:49, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you erase the absent on Rainbow Rocks shorts? --24.170.75.206 (talk) 01:40, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because nopony cares about that. It is unnecessary. - Jasonbres (talk) 02:08, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you erase mind control? --24.170.75.206 (talk) 22:10, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because they are not mind controlling. They are using the power of persuasion. Big difference! - Jasonbres (talk) 22:14, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They're like Mr. Big from WordGirl to me. --24.170.75.206 (talk) 22:17, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Simpsons Guy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Patrick Meighan. 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) 09:22, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]