User talk:AussieLegend

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Home   Talk   Contributions   Projects (tm)   Miscellaneous
  Userboxes   Cheatsheet   Vandals, bad
sources etc
  TV programs    
Crystal Clear app clock.svg It is approximately 6:21 PM where this user lives. (Raymond Terrace)

Custom Thumbnails[edit]

Seeing that you set all the Total Drama thumbnails sizes back to default, is there a way to set a custom size for all thumbnails on your settings. Like I heard a way where you can set the default size of all thumbnails on all articles so they can be bigger for me, but still small for you guys. I'm still kinda new here so I thought a more experienced user like you would know Giggett (talk) 23:54, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

You can change the default thumbnail setting in Preferences, on the "Appearance" tab. --AussieLegend () 23:56, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Okay thanks, I got it and yes it works. All thumbnails are back to 300px like the way they were before :) Giggett (talk) 00:00, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

What is your problem?[edit]

You're ridiculously conservative, even against obvious evidence – to the point that it's highly damaging for the encyclopedia. Take your finger off the revert button for a moment and try to see how some changes might actually be beneficial, will you? Mdrnpndr (talk) 00:02, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not being conservative, I'm doing things properly. I assume that you are talking about your inappropriate removal of content from template instructions, which I have addressed on your talk page. As indicated there, what you see as redundancy is normal, and appropriate practice for writing software documentation, and is even acceptable in normal practice throughout Wikipedia. --AussieLegend () 00:12, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm talking about you being pretty much the only user to almost always revert edits to the main TV project pages. It's like you automatically revert and put a canned message in the edit summary that seems appropriate without really trying to understand the rationale behind the edit. Mdrnpndr (talk) 00:23, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
I really don't understand what you're talking about here. I never edit WP:TV and I don't remember the last time I reverted at WT:TV. --AussieLegend () 00:31, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
You know quite well that I'm talking about the major pages spanned by the project, like Template:Infobox television and MOS:TV. Mdrnpndr (talk) 01:33, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
No I don't, because you didn't make that clear. I haven't reverted at Template talk:Infobox television. Apart from your inappropriate edit at Template:Infobox television/doc, the last revert I made there was in November, to an an inappropriate edit. Prior to that I reverted an edit 11 months ago that restored a parameter that had been removed from the template, with the explanation that it was not a valid parameter. At MOS:TV the only reversions have been to inappropriate edits. Please don't make up stories. --AussieLegend () 01:48, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
You've now made three unwarranted assertions about my edits: disruptiveness, inappropriateness, and outright lying. WP:CIVILITY ring a bell? Mdrnpndr (talk) 01:52, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
You've edit-warred at Template:Infobox television/doc, you're editing disruptively at MOS:TV, declaring a consensus where none exists and where a limited discussion to date cannot yet override a previously established consensus and you've made up stories about my editing history which is not supported by any evidence. I'm afraid your pleas of incivility are equally invalid. --AussieLegend () 02:05, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Making a second revert based on WP:AGF isn't edit warring in my book. You've clearly declared yourself WP:OWNER of both of the pages you've just linked to above, so perhaps these discussions are pointless. What isn't pointless though is pointing out your WP:HOUNDING of my edits (how quickly you jumped between those pages!) and the fact that you continually pretend not to know what I'm talking about when you obviously do. Mdrnpndr (talk) 02:15, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
I suggest that you check the definition of edit-warring, and read WP:OWNER and WP:HOUNDING. I'm afraid that I have very little tolerance for people who make baseless allegations on my talk page and any further such edits will be reverted. --AussieLegend () 02:20, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Neutral notice[edit]

There is an RfC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television#Request_for_Comment whose outcome could affect WikiProject Film. You may wish to comment. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:42, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Editing at the same time[edit]

I apologize if I inadvertently erased your edit. When I saw the edit-conflict notice, I hit the back button to get out the talk page, but my edit went in regardless. Just wanted to assure it was inadvertent. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:03, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the apology, but your edit didn't do anything it wasn't supposed to do so all is fine. --AussieLegend () 09:04, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Scorpion (TV series)[edit]

Your recent edits/summaries:

  • "incorrect use of field - Walter O'Brien is not a work see infobox instructions." I saw it before and since. The description says "The work(s)" because that's normally what a series (or film) is based on. Very rarely is it on a person. But, the parameter is "Based on" and that's what the reader wants to see.
  • "infobox fixes, ; formatting: 2x heading-style." I don't think most of that is "fixing". Plainlists are not needed if only 2 items, and why remove spaces from headings? (See Help:Section#Headings) --Musdan77 (talk) 04:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
The parameter instructions specifically say "The work(s) that the show is based on", not the person. Ignoring instructions and putting things in fields that don't match the instructions only serves to confuse readers. We have instructions for a reason. The instructions also say "Separate multiple entries using {{Plainlist}}", not separate more than two entries. (2 is multiple. Headings in articles should be consistent, either all spaced or all unspaced. The script that I use identifies headings that are not consistent with the majority of headings. In the case that you give as an example, 9 headings were unspaced and only 2 were spaced, so the script identified those headings that needed changing to make all headings consistent. --AussieLegend () 07:17, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
1) like I said, the parameter is "Based on" and that's what is seen and that's all the reader cares about. Those instructions are guidelines. You have to be able to "read between the lines" sometimes. There are exceptions, such as this one. 2) I disagree that "2 is multiple". Most definitions of the word say "several" and "numerous". In fact, I would say the 2 is not really a list. 3) I understand about consistency, but I don't think it's necessary to change things that don't affect the actual page. ..If I'm wrong about that, please explain why. --Musdan77 (talk) 20:15, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
The template instructions are not simply guidelines that you can choose to follow or ignore at will. They have been chosen for a reason and should be followed unless there is very good reason not to. We need to be consistent. Would you consider putting "Canada" in first_aired if a US program first aired in Canada? No, because that's not the purpose of the field. You can disagree that "2 is multiple" all you like, but the dictionary definition of multiple is "having more than one" and 2 is more than 1. It's certainly not necessary to change the headings so they're all consistent, but there's certainly no reason why we shouldn't be consistent. There's no need to mow your lawn, to flush the toilet after you're done or turn the lights off when you leave a room, but we do them. --AussieLegend () 03:25, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Re: A million inches[edit]

Hi, AussieLegend. I may not have expressed myself fully in the edit summary, but having the unit in parentheses does in fact imply "viewers in millions" or "in millions of viewers," as it's a unit of measurement (although actually some episode lists like List of Downton Abbey episodes/List of Seinfeld episodes do fully spell it out). I'd also point to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Television, which presents the correct usage. -- Wikipedical (talk) 05:50, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

It implies "viewers in millions" but that could also be implied if we put "x 1,000,000". I'm well aware of the example in MOS:TV but that's just an example relevant to the series overview table. It doesn't mandate that we have to use that wording. --AussieLegend () 07:20, 4 March 2015 (UTC)