User talk:CAWylie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

My DYKs[edit]

To view these, please see User:CAWylie/DYKs. These include: Alfie Fripp, Jean Giambrone, Jocelyn Hay, Inez McCormack, Jake McNiece, James Muri, Anna Litvinova, Elaine Laron, Toby Saks, Jeremy Geidt, "The Magical Delights of Stevie Nicks" episode, Rosemary's Baby, William Honan, and Chester Nez.

I apologise[edit]

I apologise for the edits made concerning Cedar Cove. I was merely correcting to match the source given for the date. The edit summary of A little research goes a long way before making changes.' I feel was a bit uncivil on your part, and that you weren't assuming the good faith of my edits. So I was just coming to explain why I made the edits that I did. It was not malicious or on wrong-doing, it was to match the source given. livelikemusic my talk page! 17:09, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

My apologies for not changing the source back when I added it to the Season 2 episodes. But you also didn't need to come here to explain why those changes were made, even though there was no edit summary here, which supercedes "good faith" assumptions, in my opinion. Hence, the borderline incivility, as you claim. — Wyliepedia 20:25, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I just felt the need to come here, as I felt the incivility was uncalled for in its use. That's all, it was a clear misunderstanding on both parties faults. Shit happens in life, lol. Just glad the proper sourcing is provided as of yet for a series that is very well developed, etc. livelikemusic my talk page! 16:58, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for calling me out. I'm walking away, before I really become uncivil. — Wyliepedia 17:01, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Jimmypopeyedoyle[edit]

I think we're going to have issues with this editor. If you look at his talk page, he's been warned about edit warring and about lack of edit summaries over and over again. I put a new warning on his talk page, but I doubt it's much of a deterrent. I also noticed he's been going through some of the individual episode articles and changing names there, too. He's done some constructive edits, but not enough to make me thing anything but wholesale reverts are the answer to his editing behavior. --Drmargi (talk) 03:34, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Perception Character History[edit]

I noticed that Daniel Pierce is quoted in several online sources, including the "Perception Wiki" as well as some other Wikipedia pages as him being a neuropsychiatrist, yours quotes him as a neuropsychologist. Is Daniel a Ph.D. (e.g. clinical psychologist with post-doc training in neuropsychology) or an M.D./D.O. (e.g. psychiatrist with a post-doc fellowship in neuropsychiatry? The reason why I ask, is because the professions are entirely different, especially in scope of practice, measurement and treatment of disorders. I suppose my only intent is to find this out to help the movie community keep consistency in character history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.181.152.188 (talkcontribs) 21:16, July 23, 2014‎ (UTC)

Please ask this at Talk:Perception (U.S. TV series). Thanks. — Wyliepedia 08:46, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Image[edit]

Here, have some "Chanhmuoiglass" for your help to that article. I don't know how it tastes but should be good in summer time; it is cold, has lemon, what else? Kind'a Vietnamese lemonade.

Thanks for the edit. I know where the image should go, but not how to do it. (Too lazy to learn those things... :-) Regards. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 07:49, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Normally, I'm too lazy to fix such a thing, but that was easy. — Wyliepedia 07:52, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Too bored?[edit]

Why not help with this? Sources abound. None of us is less expert than the others. Even c/editing would be appreciated. (More will be rewarded with baklava... :-) Thanks and regards. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 07:59, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Lazy, not bored. When I'm on a better device, I'll see what I can do this week. It does need a more-expert touch than mine, true. — Wyliepedia 08:15, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

User problem[edit]

Can you block or stop this single-purpose account? Doesn't give peace to a recently passed-away soul. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 09:02, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I've requested them to stop on their talk page. Most editors get three of these warnings before action is taken. As for blocking, that's out of my league. But we can report them to have it done, if it continues. — Wyliepedia 09:40, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

TV networks templates[edit]

Hi, CAWylie! I saw that you reverted my edits on the templates of the TV networks, and I just wanted you to know that I'm fine with the definite article ("the") being dismissed in alphabetical ordering. I'm just wondering what else do you think should be dismissed. I was looking for consistency throughout the templates, and this is hardly the case even now. In addition, by choosing to revert all of my edits, based on the notion that all of them had to do with the definite article, was an act of dismissal of an editor's work that took time and effort. You reverted valid edits that had nothing to do with the aforementioned subject, thus several shows are still misplaced.

  • On the ABC template:
    • Primetime: "Resurrection" should be placed before "Revenge", not after "Rookie Blue"
    • News: "This Week" is misplaced whether you count or discount the word "this" in the title
      • Yes check.svg Done.
  • On the CW template:
    • 2000s debuts: "Beauty and the Geek" should follow "(The) Beautiful Life: TBL", not precede it
    • Current: "(The) 100" should precede "America's Next Top Model", not follow "Supernatural"
    • Upcoming: "(The) Messengers" should follow "Jane the Virgin", not precede "iZombie"
      • Yes check.svg Done.
  • On the NBC template:
    • Sports: "NFL on NBC" should follow "NBC Golf", not precede it
    • Saturday morning: "(The) Chica Show" should precede "Justin Time", not follow "Tree Fu Tom"
      • Yes check.svg Done.
  • On the Telemundo template: (the Spanish article "el" should also be ignored?)(what about the Spanish preposition "en"?)
    • Telenovela: "Decisiones" is definitely misplaced whether you count or discount the article "el" in the other shows' titles; "En Otra Piel" is definitely misplaced whether you count or discount the Spanish preposition "en"
    • Upcoming: "Dueños del Paraíso" should precede "Dulce Amargo", not follow "Señora Acero"

(There were no definite article-related edits in this template on my part; it's obvious that you just decided to revert every edit I did without even taking the courtesy to look at them, didn't you?)

  • Reverted my edit. I don't really care about foreign article forms of "the" or "a".
  • On the ABC Family template:
    • 2000s debuts: Should the Swedish article "da" also be ignored? If yes (who really decides?), then "Da Möb" is definitely misplaced; "Kyle XY" should follow "Knock First", not precede it; what about "Las Vegas Garden of Love"? Should the Spanish article "las" be ignored?
      • Yes check.svg Done. "Da Möb" is defsorted with Da first. Your "Las Vegas Garden of Love" question seems kind of petty.
  • On the HBO template:
    • 2000s debuts: Should the slang form of the definite article "da" be ignored in "Da Ali G Show"? Who is to make this arbitrary decision what is omissible and what isn't from the official title of a show? "(The) Life and Times of Tim" should be before "Little Britain USA", not after "Unscripted"
    • Current: "Hard Knocks" should be before "HBO First Look", not after "HBO World Championship Boxing"
      • Yes check.svg Done.
  • On the MTV template:
    • Music series: "MTV First" should be berore "MTV Unplugged", not after it
  • Not part of my revert.
  • On the Showtime template:
    • 1980s: "Shelley Duvall's Faerie Tale Theatre" should be placed before "Super Dave", not before "It's Garry's Shandling's Show". Or should we again arbitrarily act on the basis that Shelley Duvall's name does not deserve merit in the title?
    • 2000s: "This American Life" is misplaced whether you count or discount the word "this" in the title
  • Not part of my revert. However, normally, "Shelley" is part of the title, but clicking on the template's link takes you to "Faerie".
  • On the TBS template:
    • 1980s debuts: "NBA on TBS" should be after "National Geographic Explorer", not after "Tush"
  • Not part of my revert.
  • On the USA Network template:
    • 1981–1990: "Alfred Hitchcock Pesents" should be after "Airwolf", not after "Love Me, Love Me Not"; the date (1985) should be deleted per consistency; no other show mentions a date; "USA Saturday Nightmares" should precede "USA Up All Night", not follow it
    • 1991–2000: again another arbitrary decision for you to make: should the French article "la" be ignored or not in "La Femme Nikita"?
    • Current: "Suits" should precede "Summer Camp", not follow it
      • Yes check.svg Done. The year stays on "Presents" as a distinguisher from the 1955 series of the same name.

There are several other cases that deserve attention. But it's obvious that you acted on preconceptions when you decided to employ reverts on all my edits, whithout the courtesy to take a look at what I had edited. I must admit that I've never come across such a massive misuse of revert. CostaDax (talk) 15:02, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Firstly, apologies. I do most of my editing on a phone's tiny screen, so I don't catch minutiae on "walls of edits" on pages such as these. Secondly, the "the" reverts came at a time of night when I usually detach myself from Wikipedia, as a reader or editor, due to being bleary-eyed from said phone. I came across your Contribution template edits, which included the talk page discussion, and did my reverts in one fell swoop, only catching some that were correct from your "effort", since other editors would probably not correct. Lastly, I will fix the above templates I reverted, even one I didn't even break (i.e. the ABC template). As for any "arbitration", at this point, I don't care. I also must admit I've never seen such a massive misuse of alphabetical order. — Wyliepedia 16:30, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Addendum: Coincidentally, Wikipedia bots put titles that begin with "The" in with the Tees, as can be seen on any watchlist. I suppose it would take massive amounts of time and effort for someone affiliated to fix the programming. — Wyliepedia 16:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Legends[edit]

Wylie, would you take a peek at the disambiguation an editor added to Legends? Do we need that, given the names are similar but not identical? I wouldn't worry, but it's a trifle long and cluttered. --Drmargi (talk) 03:26, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Removed with explanatory edit summary. If not understood, I'll talkpage them. — Wyliepedia 03:36, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Welp, I was reverted have now took it to the talkpage. — Wyliepedia 03:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Protection[edit]

Hi,

I noticed that you have some more rights than regular users. I have an issue with Fifty Shades of Grey. It is constantly vandalized by people whom hate the books and now interfering the wiki's pages. If you check the page's history, you will understand what I mean. If you want proof, just let me know. My question is if I was wondering if you could protect or semi-protect the page from the constant vandalism? Or do I have to contact somebody else? It has been frustrating to deal with these edits, and I need help.

Thank you,

Mirela Callmemirela (talk) 14:27, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, above my pay grade. But you can request protection at WP:RFPP. Good luck! — Wyliepedia 20:43, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Best wishes[edit]

Birthday Cake22.png Happy birthday CAWylie! Keep up the good work. Regards, WWGB (talk) 11:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! I suppose I can have my cake a day early since half the world is already celebrating! — Wyliepedia 11:54, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Rookie Blue[edit]

Why would you say "sort of sourced"? The creator of the show was interviewed and said season six. I've given two websites, that mention season six. One of them being Huffington Post Canada.

http://www.thetvjunkies.com/whats-next-after-rookie-blue-finale-bombs/

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/08/07/rookie-blue-ending-season-6_n_5658448.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-tv 24.203.254.134 (talk) 13:08, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Most sources follow prose. Also, please see WP:TVUPCOMING. — Wyliepedia 20:48, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

What? 24.203.254.134 (talk) 16:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

With this edit, your sources were simply that and didn't follow anything in the empty section. — Wyliepedia 22:24, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
I tried to create a page/section for season 6, with the remaining eleven episodes, but internet stopped working.... 24.203.254.134 (talk) 02:55, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Rookie Blue (season 6) redirects to the episode list until something more notable can be added. Same goes for adding a season section at the episode list page. Per the above link, and the reason for the redirect, until something more substantial can be added, a section isn't necessary. Thanks. — Wyliepedia 04:11, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
I haven't changed it. If it does get changed before next year, it won't be by me. 24.203.254.134 (talk) 17:22, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
No worries. The closer it gets to the sixth season, and the more that gets known, someone will update it accordingly. — Wyliepedia 17:27, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Merger proposal[edit]

As a main editor of Legends, I am calling your attention to Talk:Legend_(disambiguation)#Merger_proposal.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:17, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Editing of "Mistresses" TV Show[edit]

Hello,

It says you edited/updated the page 3 hours ago, however there is a huge Syntax error. The first 2 sentences are incomplete, the first sentence needs to be deleted or both sentences need to be merged together to make one complete sentence.

thanks.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.80.2.36 (talk) 05:53, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Not entirely sure what you're talking about. Link, please. — Wyliepedia 06:06, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Weekly ranking for Rizzoli & Isles[edit]

Wylie, when you get a minute, would you go take a look at how the rankings are presented/calculated for Rizzoli & Isles? It appears to me we have an IP who bases the ranking on the Top 50 list that comes from TV by the Numbers, and presents their ranking based on the show's nightly rank. In contrast, Major Crimes (which I think you do) has their rank for the week. So we've got two articles, both showing MC and R&I #1 for last week. MC is #1 for the week, R&I for the night. Do you think we need some sort of note or qualifier on R&I to be clear that they were #1 on Tuesday, but not for the week? Otherwise, it seems to misrepresent the data, which also has a whiff of WP:OR about it. --Drmargi (talk) 21:15, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

For Rizzles, I think it's a matter of looking in TVBTN's Viewership column and comparing it to the others. For example, the recent daily listing:
  • Family Guy 2603 1.2
  • American Dad 2534 1.2
  • Big Bang Theory 3017 1.2
  • Family Guy 2428 1.1
  • Big Bang Theory 3010 1.1
  • American Dad 2297 1.0
  • Big Bang Theory 2521 1.0
  • RIZZOLI & ISLES 5206 0.8
Family Guy won the 18-49, but Rizzles won the viewership. I've seen this in nightly network articles, too. The column(s) at Rizzles' list could somehow be changed to reflect that, or we could mirror MC's. — Wyliepedia 01:38, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
The trouble is, who determines #1 and how? And should one article use nightly standings without saying so, while most use weekly? My inclination is to change to weekly, using TV by the Numbers (the gold standard around these parts) given the IP editor is calculating the rank him/herself, but I don't have the time or patience to go back and fix four seasons worth of errors. --Drmargi (talk) 22:04, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Weekly seems to appear better, as daily simply means it beat syndicated shows or sports games. Rizzles and its TNT network are currently trouncing weekly competition, which is numbered by TVBTN, rather than eyeballed and estimated by a ratings troll. But that takes a major overhaul and re-sourcing, and I just don't have the time (one reason I l-o-a-t-h-e ratings tables). — Wyliepedia 13:45, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Journalist?[edit]

How fun! I didn't know that about you! I started out in broadcast journalism during my period where I was determined not to be a teacher (the family business), but it was a time where the first or second question I was asked usually had something to do with my coffee (metaphorically if not literally.) Nice comment on Castle! --Drmargi (talk) 22:01, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I was on my high school newspaper, my Air Force base newspaper, and a local sports reporter (post-service). Coffee, not included. Then, I decided to get into publishing (typesetting), since I liked doing that more than brainstorm story ideas. — Wyliepedia 13:38, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Just saw your comment re: A&E and Longmire. Here, here!! If TNT has any sense, they'll grab it. --Drmargi (talk) 23:10, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I think TNT skews younger, but it is part of Warner TV. I foresee A&E ending Bates Motel after this next season, too. Not that I want to watch the network any longer. — Wyliepedia 15:55, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

"Uh no."[edit]

Well, fine. But know that your change makes the page less accurate than it was before. Now readers will believe that Marshall Taylor might have been a doctor who went to Harvard, which he wasn't. Begler explains the connection quite well in the cited source. I'm a Wikipedia neophyte, granted, but why not fix it instead of "Uh no"-ing it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Priceyeah (talkcontribs) 01:28, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I did fix it, by reverting your allusion. — Wyliepedia 03:53, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Samuel Sadela[edit]

Greetings,

Regarding this source: http://www.punchng.com/news/nigerias-oldest-pastor-samuel-sadela-dies-at-114/: It may be a source to tell us that he's died but it's NOT a reliable source when it comes to determining his age. Remember, this is a longevity claimant. While there are several genuine claims to 114+ years old, there are many fraudulent ones. In Mr Sadela's entry on Deaths in 2014, he is described as "Nigerian pastor, unverified claimant for world's oldest man". Note the word UNVERIFIED. His age has not been proven and there is subject to doubt. Only seven verified men have ever lived to the age of 114, so it's quite a claim. Therefore, I say that a question mark should be put beside his age until/unless his age can be proven.

Cheers, Ollie231213 (talk) 15:51, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I suggest you broach this matter at Talk:Deaths in 2014, regarding page format. — Wyliepedia 15:56, 31 August 2014 (UTC)