User talk:AussieLegend

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Home   Talk   Contributions   Projects   Miscellaneous
  Userboxes   Cheatsheet   Vandals, bad
sources etc
  TV programs    
Crystal Clear app clock.svg It is approximately 6:49 PM where this user lives. (Raymond Terrace)

Logo for Boomerang (Latin America)[edit]

Hey Aussie, hope the day finds you well. I notice some logos at Boomerang (Latin America), but I seem to remember something about only including logos on the main topic's article, but not for secondary articles. So we might reasonably have a logo for Disney Channel, but we would not include logos for Disney Channel Asia or Disney Channel Outback. Is that correct? What's the guideline on that? If anyone would know, it's you. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:42, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

What you "seem to remember" is correct. There are a number of non-free Boomerang logos used on multiple pages. This should probably be brought up at WP:NFCR. --AussieLegend ()

New Lost Girl (season 5) article submitted[edit]

Hello, Aussie. I created the Season 5 episodes article, templates included (image awaits release of DVD), and submitted it for review an hour or so ago. The current so-called "Lost Girl (season 5)" article is actually a redirect to the "List of Lost Girl episodes" article. I don't know how to delete the redirect.

Wikipedia's instructions for creating a new article are somewhat of a runaround and not as direct and clear as they should be. Don't know how it happened but two submissions appear for the same article -- when all I wanted to do was edit some minor errors that I didn't catch the first time around. I'm hoping that what I corrected and saved is going to be the article that appears as "Lost Girl (season 5)". But I'm concerned about how it shows up on the submissions page:<be>

(1) User:Pyxis Solitary/Lost Girl (season 5)
(2) Draft:Lost Girl (season 5)

After I made the edits I followed additional instructions that suggested the article should be moved to "Draft". Are they one and the same? I have no idea. It's too discouraging to deal with any longer, but I wanted to give you a heads-up that the new article is on the way (I hope). Pyxis Solitary (talk) 13:02, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

You could have just created the article in your userspace and then copied and pasted over the top of Lost Girl (season 5). That's usually the easiest way, but what you've done works too. --AussieLegend () 13:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Can you delete the redirect? Because when I edited the article after submitting it for approval a warning appeared that the article already existed and I, the editor, was asked to double check what I was doing. The redirect might cause a problem. P.S. Wikipedia's instructions for creating articles are iffy, and certainly nowhere did I see any info about being able to copy-and-paste over the top of an existing article name. That 'create your article in your user sandbox' is confusing and Wikipedia basically assumes that everyone can figure things out. (Not when I'm tired.) Pyxis Solitary (talk) 00:59, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I can't delete the redirect, but if you had copied and pasted the article it would simply have been a matter of overwriting the redirect code as part of the normal editing process. --AussieLegend () 15:23, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
No, Aussie. You're assuming that every, single Wikipedia editor is familiar with these procedures. I've spent a lot of time and effort helping to build the Lost Girl article, yet I did not know that I could overwrite a redirect code. It is not a "normal editing process" for the majority of editors who don't engage in the constant, heavy editing of Wikipedia articles. And how could I possibly overwrite the redirect when I don't even know where to find it? When you click on the existing Lost Girl (season 5) link you are taken to the List of Lost Girl episodes main article. It's a tail chase, Aussie. Who created the redirect and WHY? Did no one give a thought to the possibility that it might cause a problem down the line?
Is there any way that you can check on the status of Draft:Lost Girl (season 5) because I am concerned about the following message at the bottom of the page: "Warning: The page Lost Girl (season 5) already exists. Please verify that it is not a copy of this submission and that this page does not need to be moved to a different title." Thanks. Pyxis Solitary (talk) 07:55, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Redirects are no different to any article. If you can edit an article, you can edit a redirect. When you go to a redirect page and it sends you to another article, it's a fairly simple process to get back to the redirect. For example, when you end up at List of Lost Girl episodes, scroll to the top and you'll see that the page title has text under it as follows;
List of Lost Girl episodes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
((Redirected from Lost Girl (season 5))
Just click on Lost Girl (season 5) and it will send you straight back to the redirect, where you can edit it as you wish. The redirect was created in April 2014,[1] for reasons known only to the creator. Draft:Lost Girl (season 5) is waiting review. As explained at the bottom of the page, there is a backlog. --AussieLegend () 10:21, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Myth Names[edit]

Hello AussieLegend. For the 2015 season of MythBusters, it seems as though they are not including individual myth names. So, on the 2015 season page, should there be no sub-headings like previous seasons? All the myths could just be in one table. It is not ideal, but it seems like some IPs are just making up titles to the myths, which does not seem appropriate. Thanks. SAJ (T) 06:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Frustrated grapes[edit]

Grapes posted a frustrated reply to my response on the matter of TV:OVERVIEW, then withdrew it and then expressed frustration. Maybe one thing we should be doing as WikiProject Television members is a little outreach? I can't say I'm very good at that, but maybe as a team, we need to challenge ourselves by inviting people who are obviously here to contribute? Grape is typically a good editor. Koala15 I wish would start communicating more, especially with edit summaries. There are some other editors I tend to consider constructive, like FilmandTVFan28, although I wish they would be better with sourcing. If we fleshed out the project, we would be better able to challenge confirmation bias and come up with ideas that are better suited for academics. Just a thought. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC)