Talk:Doomsday Preppers

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please let me know what you think about the page. I am the Seed Collector and was on show #6. I think the format is better on the page and at least the names and show participants are right.

Preston - prayer@liveprayer.net - 970-901-6957

Nice little ad for the production company there I'm so glad they have a reputation for 'fresh' programming, lol. 98.208.3.76 (talk) 07:20, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Was not an ad, they are the production company. Give them credit they work hard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seedcollector (talk • contribs) 05:17, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Series about Fukushima?

5 external links (4 from one source) about Fukushima seems a little excessive. I left the one that specifically mentions 'Doomsday' in the title, as well as the one that was apparently important enough to sneak into an episode description; the other three are below (if they are reliable, they might be useful over at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster page):

71.234.211.99 (talk) 17:05, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seedcollector's Reverts

First of all, your edits to the Doomsday Prepper article were (on average) good improvements. However, we seem to disagree on a few points. Firstly, as I detailed in the above section, I don't think we need all five external links about Fukushima (only one interviewee, out of the many interviewed for the series, seemed particularly interested in it, and it certainly isn't a major focus of the show). Secondly, the paragraph I deleted in the season finale description seemed more like a review of the whole series and prepping in general; inappropriate for an episode description of a Wikipedia article. Also, specifically, what was so bad about my slight changes to the episode descriptions that required a blanket revert? (I know I at least improved the grammar on a few of them.) I will wait a day or two before possibly reverting your reverts, during which I hope you will provide convincing evidence for your edits. 71.234.211.99 (talk) 16:25, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I wouldn't have as many issues/questions if you left informative edit summaries for your edits. 71.234.211.99 (talk) 16:25, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not do this to the page. National Geographic is happy with the content. The paragraph at the end was a general comment since it was the season finale. The season finale was a overall review of the series, yes. Your revert of all the comments was done since some of the material removed was added at the request of the cast members who participated. Do you work for National Geographic? Do you work for Sharp Entertainment. If not Please leave this page the way it is. If it was only grammar I will always understand but do not remove chunks of content to your liking. This is not a page you are in charge of. Please understand.

I spent hours entering the content that you removed and I would like to kindly request that you become a member of wikipedia with a username before you do any more massive edits such as this to pages people have spent a great deal of time working on. We can go on day after day reverting each others work but since I was a cast member on the show I need you to inform me of your interest in this specific page and why you intend to continue to modify it against the wishes of the companies and people involved.

There was nothing slight about your changes there were many and they were massive. Some of your changes could not be reverted so it may take hours longer to get it back to the way it was. Please wait a week if you want to come back to "grammar check" the page. By then the page will be fixed. Seedcollector (talk)

It seems you may be unfamiliar with some Wikipedia policies. First, please sign your talk-page posts by typing four tildes at the end. Second, I suggest you review some of the policies/guidelines I linked in my above comment. In them, you will see that "the wishes of the companies and people involved" rarely matter, and, indeed, should be viewed with suspicion (see WP:CONFLICT & WP:NPV). In addition, I realize I am not in charge of this page, and niether are you. As the linked policy states: "If you create or edit an article, others can make changes, and you can not prevent them from doing so. In addition, you should not undo their efforts without sound reason." I gave specific reasoning (in line with wiki policy) for each of my edits. You do have a good point about getting a username, however, it would appear I have worked on a larger variety of articles than you, and I have almost identical powers as an IP (and am "a member of Wikipedia") that you do as a relatively new "username editor", so its mostly irrelevant.

Now, on to specific edits. I have yet to see any reasoning for inclusion of so many Fukushima-related external links (remember, the article is about the series, not just what one participant thinks/fears; see: WP:EL), so I am still tempted to revert that. The episode descriptions are largely subjective; if you truly think my edits were not improvements, I'm fine with giving you a while to work on them. However, the paragraph at the end is still a POV review of the whole series (and "The production companies/network/participants like it" is not a good reason) that doesn't belong in the article what-so-ever. It will need severe editing, and, ideally, referencing and possibly moving to it's own section, in order to be in line with other Wikipedia articles and Wikipedia policies. And I will not "wait a week ... to "grammar check" the page", I will wait a reasonable period of time for your response, and act how the guidelines deem appropriate, at my convenience. As an aside, I have no particular motive/intrest toward this article; I simply saw the show, am a bit of a prepper myself, saw the article, saw room for improvement, and attempted to improve. (By the way, It's a good thing some of my edits could not be so easily reverted, you nearly violated WP:3RR) 71.234.211.99 (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the excessive links. I also made the POV at the bottom, signed by me. I was on the show, they monopolized my life for 2 days, and deserve that right. I only added the extra links because they were so significant. As you point out, yes I am naive about the system and rules which should give you an honest answer as to how I have am not here to micro manage the page, just give it life. You should have seen it before I started, it was useless with improper names matched with wrong shows. You come on strong but I am honestly trying to help and have spend considerable time contacting some people to make sure their information on the page was correct. This is the only wiki page I ever touched and now am losing the taste because no matter what I do, no matter how much I help the page I will have to deal with people that always know more than me and want to destroy my honest work. I am sure the unpaid cast members that were promised grand things will be happy that they got screwed again online. I sure do... Seedcollector (talk)

Whoa. First, thank you for recognizing the links were excessive, and removing them per WP:EL. Second, I didn't mean to WP:BITE you; after all, as far as number of edits is concerned, I'm fairly new here too. I felt I had to come on strong because conflicts-of-intrest can be a big problem, and you admitted to a potential conflict of interest. Like I said above, most of what you've done was improvement; even reverting my edits could have been argued to be improvement (which is why I offered a chance for explanation). Unfortunately, there is still a problem with that POV paragraph. Opinions, no matter how valid, do not belong in Wikipedia articles (unless they are the opinions of a reliable source, with citations). Also, signed comments are for the talk page, not articles (and signatures are generated automatically when you type four "~" (tildes)). So, unless you can edit it to comply with (WP:NPOV, WP:OR, etc.) it will still have to go. (there are plenty of places to put your opinions and get back at the show, but Wikipedia is not one of them). And I wasn't trying to 'destroy your honest work', I was simply trying to improve the encyclopedia (which is, after all, the main reason we should all have for being here). Evidence of that is that I did not simply revert your reverts (and so on), or report you to the conflict of interest notice board, but instead opened a discussion (the preferred method of averting conflicts). The fact that 'anyone can edit' can be a harsh reality of this project, and one I hope you can work with.

In short, I hope I didn't scare you off; I think you have great potential for future editing. While you could certainly continue editing this article, I would recommend you take a break from this article, skim a few of the major policy pages (linked above and on your own talk page), and try you hand at some other articles (those that you are knowledgable about, but have less of a vested interest in; you seem to have some expertise in computers and agriculture). This article (and all your previous edits/versions; see the history) will always be here, ready to be improved once you're a little more familiar with wikiquette. 71.234.211.99 (talk) 01:29, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I moved (not deleted, not 'destroyed' in any way) your "signed" paragraph to the Reception section I just created (it seems to fit better there than in an episode description). Bear in mind, however, that since it is unsourced original research, it could still be deleted by anyone, at any time, without warning (mind you, it would still exist in the history, in case you wanted to recover it). I also moved (again, not deleted) the Fukushima Diary link from the episode 6 description (where I replaced it with links to Wikipedia's own Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster page) to the external links area, as per WP:EL ("External links in an article can be helpful to the reader, but they should be kept minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article.""...but they should not normally be used in the body of an article.") I only left the other [links within episode descriptions] because they were directly referenced in the show. If you have any issues with this, let me know. 71.234.211.99 (talk) 13:52, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seedcollector, I left a note on your talk page in regards to recent edits. 71.234.211.99 (talk) 16:07, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]