User talk:Plastikspork

Nielsen Ratings

Posted copyright warning for Nielsen Media. Plastikspork (talk) 17:10, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

IMDB is not a WP:RS

See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 17#Is IMDb a reliable_source? Plastikspork (talk) 06:56, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Other date ranges

The form since 1996 should be used in favor of 1996–present in article text and infoboxes.

— Wikipedia:MOSDATE#Other date ranges

This seems clear to me. Plastikspork (talk) 15:37, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Bob the Builder

Hi there,

I thought I was being helpful by adding the information you have deleted. For a reliable source, you can't do much better than me - I am part of the cast of Bob the Builder and the information I provided was 100% accurate. I would be grateful if you'd undo your edit.

Many thanks

Rupert Degas —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupertdegas (talk • contribs) 23:19, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you did make a useful contribution. The problem is that it needs to be referenced by a WP:RS, and the footnote provided did not support the information being added. There is an easy solution, add the information with a new footnote for a WP:RS. For example, this reference supports Rupert Degas as Scrambler. However, the infobox is already very full, and there is a notice at the top of the page about "too much intricate detail", so perhaps the best solution is to just add Rupert Degas to the list of voices without the detail about who voices which character. Thanks for your help. Plastikspork (talk) 23:54, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Jon Dalton

The audience did laugh at Jon Dalton, so get over it. That is all. Thank you. NitroMan3941 (talk) 20:03, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Great, please add a WP:RS as it's a WP:BLP. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 22:12, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Hahaha. How am i supposed to find a reliable source to support that? As he held his mouth the crowd bursted out laughing.. But hey, i'm not a fan of guys like you and Jon, so because i'm not a fan of his i'll just let this one go.. You're his fan and obviously care about his page so i won't dispute it any further. Thanks! NitroMan3941 (talk) 22:47, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I added the crowd laughed again, but left out the at him part. Theres no denying the crowd laughed, but i can see why if it indicates they laughed at him would need a source. Thanks! NitroMan3941 (talk) 22:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I removed the entire section since it has no sources. Feel free to add back parts as you locate sources. I'm absolutely indifferent to the subject at hand, but I try my best to make sure the myriad of BLPs on my watch list follow WP:BLP, which is very specific about the need for WP:RS. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 01:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Why don't you just watch the video for yourself, haven't you seen it? They laugh after he's thrown, no matter who or what they were laughing at. Maybe there needs to be a source to some other things regarding the incident that you yourself should add since you care about WP whatevers. NitroMan3941 (talk) 05:18, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey! What do you know? You fixed it! Good for you, i guess guys like you and ol' Jonny have your uses when it comes to cleaning up messes, huh? NitroMan3941 (talk) 05:21, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Charm School Gives Back

Can Please create Charm School 3 with Ricki Lake. [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Capoeira Fighter 3 (talk • contribs) 01:56, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Wait until an actual premiere date has been officially announced by a WP:RS. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 01:59, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Access dates to ymd

Hey there. I had been using a part of your script recently, "Spork: cite date mdy", on pages that were already in mdy formatting but had yyyy-mm-dd access dates. Rlevse objected to my use of it on one of the pages he had been working on, and I offered here to reverse my actions. I wondered if it would be possible to code up a method for changing the cite dates to yyyy-mm-dd. If it would be so possible (or if you think Lightmouse could do it), do you think you could give it a try for me (or tell me to ask him). It would be much appreciated.

Thank you and happy editing, NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 02:27, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I just added "Unspork: cite date", which will change any match to 'date = Month DD, YYYY' or 'date = DD Month YYYY' to 'date = YYYY-MM-DD', which includes both 'date = ' and 'accessdate = '. My script now has eight links, which may be a bit excessive. When I first wrote it, I didn't think anyone else would be using it, but now it appears there are about five people using it. Please let me know if you find any bugs, or any unsafe transformations being made by the script so I can fix it. Also, if there are any functions that you would like to have split or merged, or any other suggested improvements. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 18:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help! The script is really useful; you should think about advertising it more ;) NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 19:04, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Fall vs. autumn

I noticed your edit summary here and, while I'm not sure whether it was a sincere question, I thought I'd offer a sincere (possible) answer. Of course the edit could very well have been someone simply testing the waters, so to speak, but it also could have been someone who's not from North America. In other English-speaking countries, the word "fall" is very rarely used to mean "autumn". Therefore, "autumn" might actually be a less ambiguous word for the Letterman article since it's understood by all, even those of us who commonly say "fall". Personally, I don't care much which way it ends up in the article; I'm just offering an explanation, nothing more. :) -- edi(talk) 05:28, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I do understand the meaning of "till autumn". I just thought it was pointless to change it since both are valid, and Fall is the common term used for North American television programs. I have never seen a television station announce their "Autumn Programming Schedule". Thanks for the message. Plastikspork (talk) 16:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, good point that it's a North American program. That does make a difference. -- edi(talk) 18:07, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Amanda Habrowski

Hello, I was wondering why the speedy deletion tag? Amanda Habrowski has appeared on two popular Vh1 programs, is a well known radio personality at a major Detroit station, and is all over the web. I listed over 5 credible links to websites that have information about her, and I believe the deletion was made in error. I didnt even get 24 hours to add a "hang on" at the top of the article, and leave a message in the talk page. I kindly ask you to please reconsider your deletion. Thanks. --Lucius Sempronius Turpio (talk) 05:41, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I tagged it for speedy deletion due to lack of sources establishing notability, in particular failing Wikipedia:ENTERTAINER. This does not mean the subject is not notable, but notability was not sufficiently established through inline citations using secondary sources. Of course, this is my opinion, and the admin who actually deleted the article agreed. If you wish to have the deletion reversed, you should take it up with the admin who deleted the article. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 16:38, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Amanda Habrowski is currently a contestent on I Love Money 2. Is she wins the contest i believe, using wiki standards that she would then qualify to have an article made. If she wins I plan to create an article under the same title. Please let me know weather or not you would still feel the subject lacks something and would delete the article even if she wins the current contest. Thanks. --Lucius Sempronius Turpio (talk) 05:36, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm well aware of who she is and her history on reality television. If she wins, I believe notability is still weak, but probably weakly arguable, based on my observation of AFD nominations. I've got an even better idea, why don't we try to establish her notability outside of reality television? For example, she is reportedly a popular radio personality. This would indicate that there are secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles) establishing her notability in radio. Or, perhaps she has articles written about her for other reasons? I am all for having more articles about notable people on WP, but I don't feel as though simply appearing on one show and another spin-off show is enough. Otherwise, everyone on I Love Money would be notable enough to have an article, which I don't feel is true, as these articles tend to be very short and include nothing more than a recap of what they did on the reality show. However, such a recap is best placed in the article of the respective reality show. On the other hand, if they are notable beyond the show, then it's clear that an article is helpful in consolidating this information and avoiding WP:COATRACK/WP:TRIVIA on the reality show's page. Thanks for having this discussion, and I hope we can work together! Plastikspork (talk) 13:49, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes I absolutely agree, let her notability be outside of Vh1 shows, and/or reality television. Some verifiable things are, she is a radio personality for a major American (Detroit) station, and she is a well known D.J (her mixes in Europe are known). Unlike some contestants in these programs, Amanda does qualify for an article, based on, she is known outside of reality television, she is a well known radio personality, and she even has records released in Europe. After presenting these facts I would assume, using wiki standards, that you would re-create the article that you yourself erased, considering the subject qualifies for an article. Thanks. --Lucius Sempronius Turpio (talk) 10:05, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Sure, given more WP:RS for statements of notability, I would support recreation of the deleted article. Again, I'm not the one who deleted the article. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 03:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Katarzyna Dolinska

An editor has nominated Katarzyna Dolinska, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katarzyna Dolinska and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. ... MistyWillows ^talk 00:02, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Script partly broken

Part of your script (cite date mdy/dmy) does not seem to be working properly (example article). Just wanted to let you know. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 01:07, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Charm school 3

I accidentely created a new article which you can reach by typing in "Charm school 3" as opposed to the main article "Charm School with Ricki Lake" or "Charm School 3". This was shortly after I created the other, main article. If you could delete this unneeded and out-dated copy article, it would be appriciated. I put "Delete" in the talk page of that article. Thanks Andrew097 (talk) 03:25, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

No problem. In the future you can paste {{db-author}} at the top of the article. I pasted it in there for you, but had to add some explanation since I was not the original author. The "Charm school 3" is probably harmless, if it's redirected to Charm School with Ricki Lake, but I may tag it as well. Thanks for the note and keep up the good work! Plastikspork (talk) 03:36, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Your script...

Does it work in conjunction with, or instead of, Lightmouse's? Regards, Matthewedwards :  Chat  18:39, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

It does work perfectly in conjunction with Lightmouse's script. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 18:47, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I would say 'in conjunction with'. Basically, I started using Lightmouse's script awhile back and decided to write my own to automate some tasks that I found performing myself. I try to add as many comments as possible to make it clear what it's doing. There is a very minor overlap between the two scripts, but this is very very minor. However, I used Lightmouse's script as a starting point since although I know quite a bit about regular expressions, I am still learning about javascript and interfacing it with wikipedia. You can have a look at the brief documentation and commented code in User:Plastikspork/monobook.js/script.js. Let me know if you have any further questions or if there is something I can help you automate. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 18:49, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Does "reigns" used in Australian English?

I think Australia's Next Top Model article has misspelled "Reins" in Controversy section. Should "reigns" be use in Australian English? ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 00:23, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Good question, as that is a common misspelling, and "took the reins" is correct. See for example Wikipedia:Lists_of_common_misspellings/T. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 02:55, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I really don't know the word. I use it on American English background. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 11:21, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		I, NocturneNoir, do hereby bestow this da Vinci Barnstar upon Plastikspork for his excellent work on his script. Thanks for making this such a great tool! ɳOCTURNEɳOIR talk // contribs 03:06, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

sorry...

I accidentally pasted into the american version.

sorry....

don't get so worked up about a free encyclopedia...

A simple "sorry" would have sufficed. There is no reason to add a backhanded comment. And please sign your posts with ~~~~. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 14:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

User: Zurvivor

Hello.. I don't see why my page would be deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zurvivor (talk • contribs) 23:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Basically the content is a violation of WP:NOT. You can respond and read more about it on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Zurvivor. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 23:40, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Cash Cab

Why'd you take out my comment about the Cash Cab being a Toyota Sienna minivan with tag number 1G12? Your explantion is that 1) it's "unnecessary detail." Well really, a lot of stuff on Wikipedia is "unnecessary." If you use that standard you could probably delete most of the site. And 2 you said that it's unsourced. Well, I've watched a lot of Cash Cabs and I've taken a lot of NYC taxis, and I can tell you without a doubt that it's been a Toyota minivan and its tag has been 1G12 (it's changed for this year apparently and is now 7N78). Again, if everything unsourced was removed from Wikipedia you'd lose a lot of content. I can't understand your motivation for wanting to remove an interesting detail which is totally non-controvertial. —69.200.229.108 (talk)

Thanks for your help adding content to Wikipedia. Please consider reading WP:RS, WP:HTRIVIA, WP:OTHERSTUFF, and WP:ALLORNOTHING if you have not already. The last two are about article deletion arguments, but can be applied to deletion of material. I am all for including more factual information to Wikipedia, but it really must be backed up by a WP:RS. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 15:36, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

bob characters

why did you deleated griiper and grabber from the list. they are part of the crew now. the first were in the movie called race to the finish and are going to be in an upcoming episoded called Breezy Bristle. also Mr. Bently is not the mayor of Bobs ville he was the building inspector. he is the electerd mayor in the episoded called Mr Bentley's Big Parade. can you change that and add gripper and grabber. if you need more reference just look at bob the builder.com. for pilchard can you add that she had kittens confimed in the episoded called Roley the Green Cat. thanks please respond. Ffaadstrbdetete (talk) 19:44, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I reverted your edits for two reasons, as given in my edit summary: (1) You did not add a WP:RS and (2) Your addition suffered from poor spelling and grammar. I can deal with the second issue (spelling), but the first (reliable sources) is problematic. Thanks for your help! Plastikspork (talk) 19:46, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Script-assisted editing?

Noticed your edit. What tool is that? I'm interested because I find myself doing a lot of gruntwork/cleanup, and really wouldn't mind being able to speed it up with some sort of scriptability for the repetitive stuff. DeFaultRyan 23:12, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

That particular edit was a combination of User:Lightmouse/monobook.js/script.js and my User:Plastikspork/monobook.js/script.js. The script removed all the   tags, so after the edit was finished, I did add a few back again to make the table look a bit less collapsed. Otherwise, it was completely automatic after hitting a few buttons. I keep a User:Plastikspork/script list for my own sanity as there are so many that I would like to try. If you can describe a particular repetitive task that you would like to automate, I can probably write a script to assist you. Just let me know, or if you have any more questions about how to install scripts, use them, etc... Plastikspork (talk) 23:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Celebreality Series

Hrmm... Im just thinking but should 'Tool Academy', 'Scream Queens', 'Most Smartest Model' and 'I Know my Kids a Star' but under the celebreality banner too? From the VH1 website it seems to blog over these shows in the same fashion and often the people from the shows have been seen in events with the 'Of Love' series... Anyway your opinion on this? Jamesbuc (talk) 15:26, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually im just looking at the Celebreality block on the VH1 article. Makes me wonder if the template should be under a different name and another made for the other shows? (Hogan Knows Best, Salt'N'Pepa etc etc) Jamesbuc (talk) 15:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, there are some shows missing. Of course, not every show on VH1 is Celebreality, but it appears to be exponentially increasing. There are formatting tricks to make it more compact and get rid of some of the excessive whitespace. Another option would be to remove the title characters from the top. By the way, is there some place with a comprehensive list of all the Celebreality shows on VH1? I searched on VH1 and found some useful hits, but nothing complete. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 04:01, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Would a page work labelled 'Other Shows' which lists the various shows that are not as directly connected as the love series are and to add shows to that list when possible? Im not sure of any other way to go. As far as space goes the Title Characters section could do with being cut. Also the ILM2 page has been blah'ed about by User:Happy Party Here. Im not brilliant with Wikipedia edits so could something be done? Jamesbuc (talk) 18:20, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

A note on how the shows could be cut up into 2 seperate boxes. The page is missing a few shows (Charm school for instance) but the idea still stands on that way ...of Love Series Jamesbuc (talk) 18:31, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Cindy & Mindy Hall

I declined your request for speedy deletion per A7 for this article. The article makes a claim for importance/significance in that the people described are reality tv contestants. While this may not be enough to avoid deletion via AfD as it does not meet wP:N, it does fulfill the requirements to avoid speedy deletion per A7. If you have any questions, you might want to review WP:FIELD, WP:10CSD, and/or WP:WIHSD---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:17, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. I thought it was marginal since it was entirely unsourced and seemed strange to be an article about two people with no press indicating they were twins. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 03:20, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, this is the type of article that would probably fail an AfD, but if it was sent there and the author wanted to salvage it, they probably could. I mean, twins who were on separate reality based TV series? I'm sure that you can find sources to make a reasonable article out of that basis. Which is why articles only have to make a claim of importance/significance (which is a much lower standard than WP:N).---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:25, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I will nominate it for AFD, sorry for wasting your time on a marginal case. I don't think 'Wikipedia:ONEEVENT' becomes TWOEVENTS just because you join two people together. Plastikspork (talk) 03:30, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

No problem.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Daisy of Love callout order

I made an edit to this page which you reverted as vandalism, and I'm not sure why. I marked four contestants as eliminated in episode 1. You can see this by viewing the episode at VH1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.107.0.69 (talk) 18:12, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

It was reverted as vandalism because the listed air date isn't for another couple days and you didn't include a source. A more minor point would be that it was not properly formated to conform with the format used in other Celebreality shows, i.e., include the episode number as opposed to a colorbox. Thanks for following up by providing a source! Plastikspork (talk) 20:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Tom Buchanan AFD

Could you read the Tom Buchanan AFD on MacGyverMagic's talk page. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 02:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done Plastikspork (talk) 04:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Eva Marcille

Hello, I wasn't aware that TV.com was a wiki, I'll file that away for future reference and not use it to cite anything. I've found a couple of other citations for Eva's AKA and engagement and added them to the article, but please take them out if they aren't "up to snuff", so to speak. Couldn't find anything else for now, but I mostly was just trying to improve the article. Speaking of which, the references look all out of whack, and other than changing "references" with <> to "reflist" with {} (because I think it looks better) I didn't really know how to fix them. Any ideas? Thanks. Zephyrnthesky (talk) 02:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, much better. I am developing a script to help with this process of cleaning up references. Unfortunately, it still requires quite a bit of work by hand after it runs. I got most all but the bare urls, which will require clicking through to get the titles. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 02:33, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you as well. Now I know what kind of "script" you're working on, I thought maybe you were making a movie. Cheers. Zephyrnthesky (talk) 02:45, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

.....just a quick line .....

Hi Plastikspork - sorry to clutter up your talk page (feel free to delete these lines once read). I just wanted to say I did notice your comment on your most recent edit to the Sydney Selwyn article; 13:42, 25 April 2009 'Yes, that's much better. Keep up the good work' and to thank you for what once again turned out to be helpful intervention by you (I admit I was sceptical at first).... anyhow I've learned something and do agree it has improved the article. All the best Barryz1 (talk) 21:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Please reply as to Kegel Male Trainer

I understand the reasons that the KMT article was tagged for speedy deletion, and would like to know if another, with the same title, can be reworked, while maintaining neutrality and staying within the proper narrative boundaries. Thanks kindly; I await your reply. Respectfully; Smkovalinsky (talk) 21:39, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

If you can sufficiently establish notability. Why not start by adding a section to Kegel exercise, perhaps something like 'male trainers' or whatever and possibly other male exercisers could be added as well? Assuming it's suitably well written, I would not object, and in fact, KMT could be redirected there. Plastikspork (talk) 21:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR RESPONSE. I will take your advice to heart, and speak with my client. Smkovalinsky (talk) 02:19, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Um, your client? You should seriously read WP:COI before writing anything. Plastikspork (talk) 02:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Well, I work for a multimedia firm, and many of our assignments are to write Wikipedia pages. Hmmmm. I have not had much understanding of it, and just more or less wanted to write well, and help out. Sigh. Live and learn. Smkovalinsky (talk) 02:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)