User talk:TheDJ

Archives

Welcome to my talk page !
I'd love to hear from you, simply leave a message.

Joe Sanchez page

Hi, I was wondering if you would remove the afd tag on the Joe Sanchez page. I made many changes to the external links and he meets the WP:BIO criteria of notability for Secondary sources. I just added the page yesterday and was not given any opportunity to edit the page before you nominated for deletion. could you move to talk page until the page is edited? -Brentwood

Hi Buddy

Why the article is considered for deletion? I assure the information is wholly correct. --Prashrb 18:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template category

re: Hi, I was looking at your most recent changes to Template:Ltswpd, and i highly doubt that the part"This (root template category)", is intended as displaying: "This (root template category)" in the final result. Can you clarify ? --TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 21:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

This will have to do for now. The problem is the name that the name/link which needs 'displayed' along with it's text varies all over hades. Not even my English is that bad MOST of the time. <g> I've written and tested a utility to test multiple site names a couple of weeks ago (I think on Wikiversity), and that will need be relocated to do this up better. Thanks for the heads up... that was pretty bad. // FrankB 16:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Hey TheDJ, I was wondering, would you be interested in joining a new WikiProject, WP:IS NOT WAS? We need some members :P .. Anyway, I'd be fine if you said no :) Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 18:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC) Have a nice day![reply]

Although I share your point of view, I do not think it's wise to fair into such a WikiProject at this time. I'd like to take active part in this discussion that is currently ongoing, but I don't want to be vulnerable to a potential "campaigning" claim if this gets out of control. --TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 18:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, okay, no problem, I respect your choice :) .. You're the first and only person I've asked so far, but I won't be spamming :D .. Have a nice day!Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 18:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove those checkmarks?

Why did you remove those checkmarks on the top right corner of the Wikipedia policy pages that bring you to Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines? I was trying to make those articles better. Masky (Talk | contribs) 12:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Succession Lists

Okay, what I did was went into the internals of the Template:Episode navigation and changed the first two parameters (preceded by, the title of the show) and to match the standards as established by Wikipedia:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization. The third one (succeeded by) I modified slightly but kept as an independent script so that it would still say followed by. I think this will work the best. Since I did that on the master template, all sub-templates such as Template:AD navigation are automatically following the same standards. Thanks for the note, anything to standardize this site is good for the site.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 01:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

4400

Exactly. It also does not use a few fields the primary infobox uses, such as images (which are used within the context of the article to comply with the FUC), by variable I mean it is varied from other infoboxes. Matthew 21:32, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Logos

The logos are already loaded into Wikipedia and just shorted down to size. If fair-use is put into effect for use this way, it would have to be for the logos on the pages already used. (ie: CBS logo on the CBS page). - SVRTVDude ^{(Yell - Toil)} 01:48, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Being that I actually have the strength to fight you on this one now....I am asking for specific rules on fair-use. Everyone's interpretation of the rules, vague as they are, are just going to lead to back and forth fights like this and articles that are blank of historic images and information because of one editor's interpretation of the fair-use rules. There can't be an image that is both OK and in violation at the same time. - SVRTVDude ^{(Yell - Toil)} 05:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But since it is being used a visual cue on the main page (ie: NBC) and others that have to do with the respective networks, use of them on the network affiliates, some of which are owned and operated (like WABC-TV is owned by ABC) is not too big a stretch. Now, if you were using it like, for the Peter Jennings page, then that could be a violation...yes, he worked for them, but everyone knows that. I don't think 50px or smaller logos on the affiliates of the respective network, even on the ones that are owned by that network (so there is no violation there) is a violation nor decorative, actually it is innovative and different. - SVRTVDude ^{(Yell - Toil)} 05:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so it would even be violation on O&O pages? WABC-TV is owned by ABC, WNBC-TV is owned by NBC, WCBS-TV is owned by CBS....under current rules the respective logos could be added to these pages with no violation, but not to WHSV, WVIR or WDBJ (ABC, NBC, and CBS affiliates respectively). Does this make sense? - SVRTVDude ^{(Yell - Toil)} 05:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice trying to explain it as if this was a sentence. But....WABC, being a station owned by ABC, and ABC, the owners of the ABC logo, would be allowed to use the ABC logo in the WABC page, since the owners are the same.

No matter how you split it though, you can't deny that it is a 50px or less logo that most will more-than-likely overlook or go "wow, that's neat" and move on (and would never bring a lawsuit). I don't know how many new ideas (like this) are instantly reverted by "fair-use", hence my call for specific rules on fair-use, not this vauge crap that any ol' editor can interpret his/her own way. - SVRTVDude ^{(Yell - Toil)} 06:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...and I like I have said about a bazillion times, I would place good money on not one network suing over the use of the logo on Wikipedia, nor in such a small use, as long as credit is given.

I run a radio and TV news website. I use station logos all the time, with no problems. I put in tiny letters, logo property of WXXX or whatever. I also have a page that says that "all logos for radio stations, TV stations, etc are property of those stations and used by SVRTV (my site) for information purposes. SVRTV is not affiliated with these stations." Never asked permission to use them in the first place and never have had a single problem nor a single request to remove them. Never been sued either.....so I kinda doubt ABC, CBS, etc are going to come after Wikipedia for using tiny logos like this Image:CBSeye.svg.

So, as long as it is being used in the station infoboxes and used properly, I see no problems. If Wikipedia is asked to remove them from the infoboxes, then you do so, til then, we should use them as a "visual cue" as you called it on the infoboxes....you have to admit, it does look cool. - SVRTVDude ^{(Yell - Toil)} 06:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TVep

Martinp23 and I worked at it for some time but couldn't seem to get the delayed substitution to work (we had it *closer* using <includeonly>), but still never got it perfect. Could you pop over to Template:TVep and give it a shot? Otherwise, we'll have to replace approx. 300 instances by hand, which will take *quite* awhile. Thanks. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 01:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, just drop me a note if/when you've got it working so I can set my bot to work on it. Many thanks, ^demon^{[omg plz]} 02:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still doesn't work. It outputs the right text in read mode, but still puts a good portion of the function straight into the article. I'm beginning to think this template is un-substitute-able. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 07:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A heads up on Mmbabies

When reversing anything, especially articles that have to do with Houston television, look at the data VERY CAREFULLY -- a banned user named "Mmbabies" has been using lots of IPs to change the information as he sees fit. For example, the page for KHCW, which you have reverted due to fair-use image abuse, was reverted to an earlier revision that had the CW on channel 14 (which is actually KETH) You can see his rap sheet at User talk:Mmbabies. -- azumanga 12:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: American Dad!

While not my most eloquent contribution, I've added a section on the headlines used in the American Dad! opening. You can link to this subsection American_Dad!#Opening sequence. I've also made a similar edit to Futurama at Futurama#Opening sequence. Hoof Hearted 19:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I took care of it. Hoof Hearted 18:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article assessments

Thanks for your kind note on my talk page. The positive feedback is really important when faced with such a large task. I'd like to say thank you to your for all the work you've done re-energising the project, I've been editing lightly for a few months and it was refreshing to come back and see some activity at WP:TV. Your technical knowledge seems well in advance of mine so I might come by and bug you for help with templates in the future! Thanks again and:

The Original Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		Keep this barnstar as a record of your hard work getting the WP:TV assessment pages up and running and all your hard work on the project in general. Opark 77 00:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I wanted to tell you thanks for participating in the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Use of international wheelchair symbol. Feel free to add anything else you'd like to say on the issue. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 02:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Television

Hey, sorry, I was in the middle of several edits, and it looked like you jumped in. Did not mean any sort of edit war or dispute. I had previously tried num_seasons and it didn't work, which is why I reverted to num_series, since that always worked. Just trying to document only what actually works now. --Lexein 14:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia logo

Organizational logos used on the article about the organization themselves are an acceptable form of use of unfree images; see {{logo}}. If you really feel compelled to see this listed on the image page, you're more than welcome to add a note to that effect.

On an largely unrelated note, if you should ever in the future actually wish to remove an image from an article (as opposed to merely raising trouble to try to make a point), please remember to remove the caption as well as the image. Thanks, --Robth^Talk 11:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a brief rationale to the image. Low resolution is something we do to ensure that we are not diminishing the value of someone else's image by providing a high-res copy that could replace the original, which is not a concern here. I suggest that you not remove the image from the article again. --Robth^Talk 13:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Please do not edit war with your fellow Wikipedians, especially over an issue as stupid as the foundation's own logo. Such actions are grounds for a block. Show more cooperation and discussions, and do not attempt to be WP:POINT about it. You should know better than to do this, I would think. —Pilotguy cleared for takeoff 13:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for fixing up Template:Little Einsteins episode -- I was having a hard time with the template, and just gave up. Templates are not my strong point. Thanks! - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 23:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inés

The aunt and presumed godmother's name is spelled Inés and they've already corrected the spelling of the middle name once from Inez to Ines. I think by the end of the day they will correct it again to Inés, the correct Spanish version of the name. But do what you want.--Bookworm857158367 11:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox rocket

I think you may have broken this template. See Space Shuttle, Ariane 5. - 66.93.200.116 13:31, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sorry

I weren't cross at you I was cross at someone else anyway sorry about that. Dyou think we'd be better off with screenshots on the pages? Mr. Garrison (talk · contribs)

Help please!

I moved all of the 30 Rock articles you requested and bit off more than I can chew right now with the dabbing. I already did the main article (30 Rock) and that took, well, quite some time. There's no pressing urgency because all the old names are still blue-linked through redirects. In the hope that you are willing to help, I am posting below the dabbing links.

Special:whatlinkshere/The C Word
Special:whatlinkshere/Jack the Writer
Special:whatlinkshere/Jack-tor
Special:whatlinkshere/Jack Meets Dennis
Special:whatlinkshere/The Baby Show
Special:whatlinkshere/The Rural Juror
Special:whatlinkshere/The Head and the Hair

Thanks.--Fuhghettaboutit 00:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

not so much

Eddie Blake (talk · contribs) seems to have taken exception: [1], [2]. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 14:25, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Matanca.jpg

Howdy! I removed the DB tag from Image:Matanca.jpg because 'Wikipedia is not flikr' is not a criteria for speedy deletion. There are other tools you can use to suggest the deletion of the file, just not that. Thanks! - CHAIRBOY (☎) 14:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sanchez Edits

please let me know what I can do to help remove your fears about my bias. I am just looking to improve the page. I made suggestions and they were ignored so the page was deleted. Is that not protocol? Please let me know how I can improve my editing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Typewriter (talk • contribs) 00:43, 25 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

commentReponse to your comments on my talk page.

"You cannot. your (relative short) edit history shows that 90% of your edits were to Sarah Robbins"

Correct. As I have admitted I maintain her page.

"or to articles about fellow Ball State University staffers and digital media related articles that are closely related to the courses taught by these staffers."

As mentioned in the there is a Central Indiana focus to the article but the NYT article and USAToday articles mention her in the same article as Harvard and other schools.

"Also I find it awfully coincidental that User:Intellagirl, which apparently is the "official" username of Sarah Robbins, just happens to pop in during the 2 weeks in which you basically write her entire article, just to supply a photo. This reeks as you being either a sockpuppet account, or you being closely related with the subject of the article."

I am very closely related to her but have tried to create a biography article that meets notability and template requirements.

"As such I think all your edits deserve a thorough review for accurateness."

Again please do. I want to increase the quality of wikipedia.

Also if t Sanchez article is improved i have no problem with it remaining.

You may be interested the following edits though: 01:22, 10 March 2007 24.155.108.14 on Sarah's page and edits the same anonymous user made on the original Sanchez page.