User talk:The Cool Kat

Welcome to my talk page. I'm going on wikibreak for a few months. If you need to talk to me, e-mail me....

Fetch air date for season 4 is real

you delated the link. I got the info from http://www.peterbowden.com/ and he said Fetch! with Ruff Ruffman: Season 4 wrapped. On air September 2009. quit dealting check the site your self if you do not belive me.(talk) 4:42, 02 march 2009 (UTC)

199.125.109.102

Can't believe he reported me to ANI over a page move. I will take your advice and walk away from this one, even though it is really tough for me right now (I really want to ball him out for reporting me over a page move), but I will let it go. Thanks for the revert. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 11, 2009 @ 16:50

RE: Airdates and Seasons

No, I do not live in Italy. :P And I have proof that that order is correct. TV.com displays episodes according to whence they aired, so some episodes are in the wrong seasons (i.e. "The Bully", "Just One Bite", "Welcome to the Chum Bucket", "Frankendoodle", "The Graveyard Shift", "Krusty Love", "Born to be Wild", "Best Frenemies", "Squid Wood", and "Pest of the West"). You just have to look at the production codes (which TV.com also displays) to find out the seasons. If you look at their notes for "WhoBob WhatPants", you'll see that one of them says, "This episode was produced as a season 5 episode." (and that its prod code is 98) As for the airdates, all of them are correct. Check TV.com again if you don't believe me. My proof that "WhoBob WhatPants" is a season 5 episode: the "Season 5: Volume 2" DVD. If you need to make sure, click this: http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/35319/spongebob-squarepants-season-5-vol-2/
If WBWP is a so-called season 6 episode, then why is it on that DVD? Also, "Sand Castles in the Sand" is a season 7 episode because it has the prod code 121A, according the CableTVTalk.com. Is that proof enough for you?
If you reverted the edits I just made, please change them back. I didn't mean to sound rude or anything. I don't blame you for anything, it was an honest mistake. --SpongeSebastian

• Please respond. Thank you.

WP:BLANKING

I thought perhaps it might be a good idea to draw your attention to the information at WP:BLANKING. Users, including IPs, are permitted to remove almost anything from their own talk pages except for 1) confirmed sockpuppetry notices, 2) shared IP templates and 3) declined unblock requests. Anything else, including block templates, is fair game for removal and you should not revert them if they do remove warnings and block templates from their talk pages. Let me know if you have any questions on this. –xeno (talk) 17:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

E-mails

If you don't believe me, e-mail Discovery yourself and ask them when Season 4 of Jon & Kate Plus 8 will finish. No one else will and everyone automatically assumes that next week Season 4 is finished. It's called consulting the source. 70.24.233.37 (talk) 20:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually it's called original research. "Consulting the source"=primary source material, something we don't do here. See this for a full explanation of why, and of what kinds of sources we DO accept; if you still have questions, please ask at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. Thanks... GJC 20:22, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Instead of doing whatever it is you want me to do, you both can do MY job and fix the episodes up. The last two are in the wrong order. TLC has a tendency to change things around, so I"ll just send you a message, on a regular basis and you fix it. Yes, I'll be a pain the butt, but that's what you get for listening to another user, who did NOT provide a source, that Season 4 has ended. You just went by their word and they've only been contributing for a month, and interfering in the Gosselins' page for the past week. Hope you have fun, I know I will!

http://tlc.discovery.com/tv-schedules/series.html?paid=2.15585.55956.35599.x&start=40 70.24.233.37 (talk) 00:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

The last two episode of Jon & Kate Plus 8 haven't been switched around yet, why not? 70.24.233.37 (talk) 19:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Your RfA

Hi there. To expand a bit on my comment on the above page, requesting access to tools that can do so much harm to the project after having a relatively minor tool stripped is not endearing to trust. I'm not necessarily saying that you'd intentionally abuse the admin tools, but your lack of experience in those areas as well as other areas of Wikipedia lead me to think you may misuse them. I would suggest a withdrawal, and perhaps a peruse of WP:GRFA and the admin's reading list. In six months to a year of good work, and a solid commitment and understanding of Wikipedia and how it works through different policies, will see a future request succeed. Don't rush it, though. Adminship takes time, and the responsibilities are dull and need relatively solid commitment. You might want to request an editor review and, later down the line, an admin coach, which may help your editing skills some more. Thanks for your work here, and good luck in the future. PeterSymonds (talk) 14:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

• I would urge withdrawl as well. Too soon after the incident we last spoke about. –xeno (talk) 14:32, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Your RfA

I am sorry, but I have closed your Request for adminship prematurely. Simply put, this particular RfA was all but assured of not passing.

I am sorry about this, and I hope you don't take it personally. If you continue to contribute to the project in a positive fashion, I am confident that you would be able to submit a successful RfA in the future. You may wish to consider applying for an evaluation by other Wikipedia editors for feedback on how to obtain the necessary experience. Once you are ready to request adminship again, there is a great admin coaching program available, as well as a guide to requests for adminship.

If you have any other questions about becoming an administrator, please don't hesitate to ask me. Good luck! –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:03, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Parisi Industries, Inc.

For the following article: Parisi_Industries,_Inc.

Why is it shown as not having a cite? The linked site is where I read about this company and wrote information from. I did not copy it word for word but tried to write about some of the things they had shown in that article to create the page about this company.

I removed the "unreferenced" tag from this article and tried to explain the information was derived from the linked source.

Also, how is it that certain people, such as yourself, seem to be on all the articles that I work on? I presume you are an admin or something. I am just curious since it seemed a bit odd to me.

Cringer (talk) 05:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Adventures of Robin Hood

Hi there - I noticed your revert on the Robin Hood article, and - because you didn't use an edit summary - I wasn't entirely sure of the reason behind the revert. To be honest, the descriptions of the sets the anon IP added accurately reflect the sets used and the production design. I'm hoping to track down the details of the TV Guide article that was used as reference in order to verify. Howie ☎ 16:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I've since tracked down a copy of the TV Guide in question and found all the entries on the Wikipedia article to be correct. I'd appreciate if you could reply to me regarding why you chose to remove the information without checking. Thanks Howie ☎ 15:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I bought a copy on eBay - remarkably there happened to be that very issue available. Just because the source is old, doesn't mean it should be removed. After all the TV series in question is also the same age! Howie ☎ 18:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Welcome

Welcome!

Hey, welcome to WikiProject Films! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films, awards, festivals, filmmaking, and film characters. If you haven't already, please add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.

• The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for February has been published. March's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
• Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Announcements template to see how you can help.
• Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia. Check it out!

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Nehrams2020 (talk) 19:39, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Wazzo Blue Razz.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Wazzo Blue Razz.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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 STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:55, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Next time

Please don't be put off by nasty remarks like this. Be sure to let us know when you're up for admin next. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 21:47, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

MfD

Hi Cool Kat. The format has just changed at the Straw poll MfD. We must vote delete or keep only. Thanks. Dr.K. logos 01:47, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films March 2009 Newsletter

The March 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:23, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Haha

Haha elbutler youre not cool im back and when you said this is a us wikipedia i laughed all day this is a international one Simulation13 (talk) 04:04, 9 April 2009 (UTC)