User talk:Drovethrughosts

The Shield season 5

Hi, not sure I'm doing this right (bit of a noob here) but I wanted to discuss an edit you undid of mine about the R2 version of season 5 of the Shield being shortened, for being unsourced. Now I know that apart from things like amazon reviews there is no official online source confirming this as Sony never made an official statement about it, but I actually own the source material. I have both the R1 and R2 versions of season 5. Anyway I can use that as a source? Upload something maybe? Please let me know, cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.211.100.37 (talk) 00:57, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

01/19/12 Just saw you updated it with a better source. Thanks for that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.211.100.37 (talk) 02:28, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem, I just did a Google search for a reliable source for this and found that. I was going to reply sooner, but I saw you readded the content, so I just went ahead and added the new reference. Glad everything worked out. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:35, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello!

Hello there! I hope you don't mind me asking but I saw your userbox, very well done. I see you have things that say "This user watches 24" and stuff like that. Well, I was wondering if you could tell me how to create a box like that. I've been working on my userbox and I want to put one that says "This user watches The Big Bang Theory." Do you know how to do that? Everyone else I spoke to didn't know how. If you could get back to me ASAP that would be great :) Creativity97 Talk? 16:46, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello! None of the userboxes displayed on my page were created by me, I just grabbed them from the various userbox listing pages such as this. Already created Big Bang Theory userboxes are located here. To make your own custom userboxes, you can look here. Hopefully that was somewhat helpful :) Drovethrughosts (talk) 23:31, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much! All your research was very helpful :) Creativity97 Talk? 15:26, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Fringe (TV series) taskforce proposal

Hi there! As a frequent editor to Fringe articles, I thought I'd let you know I'm proposing a new taskforce for the series. If you're interested, you can find the proposal page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Fringe (TV series). Thanks, Ruby 2010/2013 04:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Frank Stanton appeared in 4 episodes and 2 seasons of Fringe and you removed him as a recurring character?! While Michelle Krusiec only appeared in 3 episodes and one season and she's listed. He even had more dialogue than some of the characters listed as 'recurring.' Please will you reinstate him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cool938 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

SFU references in PC

Would you please not arbitrarily remove our addition of a reference in popular culture concerning SFU ? I am a music journalist and a music blogger too and it would be so much more pleasant if some WP editors were being un bit more "humble" and stopped removing references they consider irrelevant just because they're not aware of them or never heard of them... let's not make of WP a fascist micro-state run by a dozens. HarryBlock (talk) 22:11, 11 February 2012 (UTC)HarryBlock

You should probably read WP:Notability first. You're just using the music video itself as a reference, that doesn't establish notability at all. Are credible third-party sources discussing this music video as somehow being notable/important? If not, it doesn't belong on the page because it's not notable and not encyclopedic. Drovethrughosts (talk) 22:38, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

We've found different references concerning the artist MeeK who recorded a single about SFU. Deciding whether references do or do not "establish notability" is extremely subjective and relative by definition and are difficult to find in this context, this artist did give several interviews but none of them have clearly been about THIS song... But Meek appears to be indeed a well-known Indie artist in Europe (he's of a French and British double nationality apparently) and this is as valid a cultural reference as any other it seems. And if that was needed : you can always check the said SFU music video and you will well see this is indeed a real professional registered video by a professional recording artist on an official commercial channel on YouTube : http://www.youtube.com/meekinthewebHarryBlock (talk) 23:18, 11 February 2012 (UTC)HarryBlock

Sorry, but if you understand the guidelines of notability on Wikipedia, it is not really subjective. The artist itself may be notable (he does have an article), but that doesn't mean you can place a line in the Six Feet Under article saying he made a song about that. Keep that information in his article, where it's notable and where it belongs. You provided several references, but none of them provide any notability.

• WBMT Agency – provides nothing but an advertisement for the artist.
• MusicBrainz – nothing but a track listing for the album.
• Freebase – simply just another listing for the artist.
• CLAUS – a random music blog. The link you provided simply mentions he has a song called "Six Feet Under".
• YouTube – the music video itself, another self-promoting link.
• Lyrics Bay – Lyrics for the song.

None of the references are useful. If anything it just seems as one big advertisement for this artist, which is what Wikipedia is not for. You responded earlier using the word "we"ve" as in your apart of some entity/group trying to push this artist's information on Wikipedia. That's a conflict of interest. You've also almost exclusively edited the Meek article as well, which is written in a very "promotional" type manner, keep using the words like "internet buzz". Bottom line: the artist has a song inspired by the TV show, but beyond that there's nothing notable that makes its inclusion in the article worth it beyond wanting to advertise this artist. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:11, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Reversion

I'm curious about this reversion. How was that WP:Vandalism? Toddst1 (talk) 14:11, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

It's addition of unsourced content. Upcoming television episodes must be sourced for their episode titles and air dates. Drovethrughosts (talk) 14:13, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

True, and I admire your commitment to WP:V. Toddst1 (talk) 14:19, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I am curious though, why did you ask? Given you're a Wikipedia administrator, the addition of unsourced content is an easy candidate for reversion; unless you're unaware of the rules regarding television episodes. Just asking, because I'm curious as to why you asked me. Thanks. Drovethrughosts (talk) 14:23, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually, addition of unsourced info is sort a grey area in terms of the appropriate use of rollback. Until a little over a year ago, it couldn't be used for anything that wasn't WP:Vandalism. You seem to be using it responsibly.

I had stumbled across this which seemed a bit heavy-handed and thought I'd open a dialog with you. Sometimes a simple inquiry such as that starts a discussion that uncovers a serious problem - more often than you'd think.

You seem to be a solid contributor and your reaction to my question was very good. As far as being heavy-handed, I can be described that way as well. After 20,000 edits as you have, some of us put up with less nonsense than others. Keep up the good work. Toddst1 (talk) 14:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. See ya around. :) Drovethrughosts (talk) 15:49, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Have you considered becoming an admin? For most folks, the tough part there is navigating the grey areas, which I see you have a very good grasp of. You've got plenty of edits. Just a thought. Toddst1 (talk) 17:51, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Adminship? Not much as I haven't looked in that really. Administrative duties do interest me a bit though, as I do enjoy "cleaning things up" and organizing things. My only concern is the bulk of my edits are limited to a certain area of Wikipedia (TV show-related articles). I'm also not all that comfortable with nominating myself, like, "look at me!". That's not my personality. I'd prefer to be nominated by someone else, because it shows they think you deserve it. Drovethrughosts (talk) 21:30, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Let me know if you want to be nominated, now or down the road. Toddst1 (talk) 21:35, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for showing interest in me. If I'd want go through with it, I'd first definitely have to do some more research regarding the process and brush up on some Wikipedia policies beforehand. Thanks again. Drovethrughosts (talk) 16:40, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Mad Men

Thanks for your help with Mad Men. Can you make sure that the TCA Awards get added to season 2.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:46, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Also, don't overlook nominations in Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Guest Actor in a Drama Series.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:23, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

You should not have reverted my removal of the non-notable actor from the Mad Men infobox. He doesn't even has his own article. Rather than revert a regular editor, you should have discussed this first on the talk page. El duderino (talk) 05:02, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't feel a discussion was needed since he's a main cast member now, thus he should appear among everyone else in the infobox, regardless if he has an article yet. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:42, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Friends episodes

Just to let you know, the table style has been discussed here: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Friends episodes/archive1. Reviewers have come to a conclusion that WP:TRANSCLUSION should be discouraged, per WP:BOLD and MOS:DTT. Feel free to add your two cents on the matter or make a comment regarding the list there. -- Lemonade51 (talk) 21:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I was unaware of that. I just kinda stumbled upon the pages and was confused why they're not using the standard episode list formatting, and why the List of episodes page didn't just transclude the tables from the season articles, as that seems to be standard across any pages I've come seen. Well, if that's what other people think should be done, go ahead. I don't watch the articles, so it won't bother me. Feel free to revert my edits. Drovethrughosts (talk) 21:35, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Mad Men S5

You deleted the explanatory text I put "It is scheduled to consist of thirteen episodes, with the premiere being a two-hour double episode. (The AMC website lists it as "Episode 1-2"" )". And added "with a two-episode premiere", with the comment "(a little cleaner. there was no concern over the numbering until you brought it up. it's simple: there's 13 episodes and the premiere is 2 episodes.)

You may think it's "cleaner" but now it makes the dubious statement that the first episode "A Little Kiss" is "two episodes". There was no "part 1 and part 2", it was a single, continuous episode. To number a single episode "1-2" is not "simple", it's unusual and requires an explanation.

The whole reason I came to that article at all was to find out what "episode 1-2" meant, and how many episodes were in the season. Not finding any clarity there, I found sources and put them in, for you to delete again few days later.

I'm not going to edit war, but you did not improve the article with your change. Barsoomian (talk) 19:25, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

How is it a "dubious" statement that "A Little Kiss" is two episodes? It is two episodes. If it wasn't, then it'll be labeled as simply episode 1 by AMC, but it's not. If we were to label it just as 1, then the season finale would end being numbered 12 in the episode list, which is incorrect, because AMC ordered 13 episodes (like they do for every season). It's a bit stubborn to argue against facts. Anyway, onto the other thing: for one, I didn't delete your reference, the AMC reference is still intact. I removed the bit "(The AMC website lists it as "Episode 1-2") because it seems a bit expository, and something that shouldn't be included in the body text. That's why the reference is there, it's serving that purpose. I simply changed the wording. "Two-hour double episode" is somewhat convoluted, "two-episode premiere" easily implies two episodes. If you still want to include the expository text, I think it's better placed as part of the reference, or used a note beside the episode numbering. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:34, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

You are invited.....

As a recent contributor to List of Friends episodes you are invited to a discussion at Talk:List of Friends episodes#Disputed changes, which is discussing recent changes that involve replacement of transclusion with custom tables. Thank you. --AussieLegend (talk) 01:51, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Template help

Hi, DTG. I was wondering if you could look at the template for Once Upon a Time and help me figure out why the "V*T*E" (the ability to view/discuss/edit the template) shows up as a red link on pages like its main page. I also listed the problem at the template's talk page. The only way I've been able to work on in it is to type "Template:Once..." into my URL line. Thanks. — WylieCoyote (talk) 18:00, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

It seems I fixed the problem. It was just a guess on my part, but there you go! And thanks for creating a Killing userbox, I'll probably put one on my userpage later. Drovethrughosts (talk) 01:42, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I did not notice the (TV series) was missing from the title. That would explain a lot. Thanks again. Enjoy the userbox! I tried to make some for everyone! — WylieCoyote (talk) 02:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Episode lists

Hey Drovethrughosts, I'm not gonna undo your edit again, we'll have to agree to differ. However, it was handy you notified me of the Dexter and Stargate episode lists in your edit summary. Interestingly, neither of them had such a lead image when they were promoted. In any case, they're both way below current standards, so I've left a to-do list on the respective talk pages. I don't know if you're particularly interested in updating either (or both), any improvements would be gratefully accepted. If the lists aren't updated soon, then I'll be listing them for demotion at WP:FLRC. I think I'll need to check over a few more of these more-ancient lists. Thanks again, The Rambling Man (talk) 14:22, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

That image (The Walking Dead) has been displayed as such since it was added, so that's why I undid your edits. It's simply a text logo with a transparent background, it looks cleaner without being displayed as thumbnail, and an (in my opinion) unnecessary caption saying it's the logo. Any other type of image would obviously need a caption and be displayed as a thumb. And several list of episodes pages that I watch that use a similar type of image (text logo with transparent background) are all displayed like that. I don't watch/edit either the Stargate or Dexter pages (or the shows themselves), I simply used them as examples from the featured lists, so no, I'm not interested in editing them. But, I guess I'm happy I unawarely brought up issues that should be dealt with on those pages I guess. Later. Drovethrughosts (talk) 15:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Looking at it, I can see the arguments for both sides—thumbnail would be needless, but there's something oddly jarring about the lack of one. Perhaps if an infobox were constructed based on {{Infobox television season}} (individual fields could be bashed out but I imagine total number of episodes, number of seasons, première date, etc would work) then a thumbnail-free image could be housed in it. I can see myself working on similar lists soon so I'd be happy to help construct something if that seems like a good route to take. GRAPPLE X 15:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

As I said, we'll agree to disagree. I have never knowingly seen a FL go through without a thumb. Anyway, once again thanks for enlightening me as to the poor state of many of our television episode FLs. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:19, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Awake

I see you have contributed to the Awake articles. Before interest in the series is lost forever, you might want to consider expanding episode articles and templates now while contributors are still engaged. If the Awake article and episode articles reach GA status, there could be an Awake Good Topic. --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Your opinion is needed

Hi, DTG. Could you weigh in on an issue? The category for The Killing's userboxers has been nommed for deletion. I would appreciate your support. Thanks. — WylieCoyote (talk) 18:52, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I just made a comment. I'm mainluy curious why that category is being targeted for deletion, when there's hundreds of similar categories like that. Drovethrughosts (talk) 19:18, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

My sentiments exactly! Someone has too much free time on their hands. Thanks for the support! — WylieCoyote (talk) 19:48, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Buffy Pages

Hello! I recently nom'd "Welcome to the Hellmouth" for GA and was wondering if you wanted to help me start whipping some of the Buffy pages into shape? I want to start up on season 4 if I have time. I think I'm also going to nominate Adam, which I heavily tweaked. Anyway, just thought I'd ask. I'd love to get the ball rolling like what's happening with The X-Files taskforce.--Gen. Quon (talk) 05:02, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd definitely be glad to help as much as I can, especially with anything Buffy related! I know you do fantastic episode articles (X-Files), so it'd be great to see some more of the Buffy episode articles get cleaned up, as most are mainly plot/trivia. Anyway, I see you use lots of book sources (such as for Adam, which looks awesome now, good job, btw!), which I don't have access to. In terms of sources, I could definitely add anything from web sources and especially information found on the DVDs from featurettes and commentaries. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:40, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

I ordered several of the guidebooks from my library, so I'm waiting for those to arrive. Quite a few of them are available online at Google books, too. As for Adam, a good chunk of the sources were already there, I just organized the page, spiffed it up, fixed the lede, and added a reception section.--Gen. Quon (talk) 14:50, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Awake WikiProject Proposal

I see you have worked on serveal of articles on Awake. Feel free to vote here for it to have a WikiProject. TBrandley • talk • contributions 07:07, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Damages

Wow, that's a lot of great work on the Damages article! μηδείς (talk) 21:18, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I recently completed watching the first four seasons, so I finally got around to do a clean-up the main article. Drovethrughosts (talk) 22:12, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

McClarenTruth.org

DirecTV has set up an actual website that Ryan Phillipe's character runs in the new season of Damages: http://www.mcclarentruth.org/. Do you think this is relevant info that should be added to the season five page?

Sure, I don't see why not. Seems like good relevant info to me. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:16, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know...

I commented on this: Talk:List of Undeclared episodes#Merge episode list to main article. QuasyBoy (talk) 00:04, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I saw that. I left a message on the editors talk page that undid the merge, to note him of the discussion. Drovethrughosts (talk) 21:23, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Six Feet Under

Isn't it set in Los Angeles? Fuddle (talk) 00:31, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't even realize I reverted your edit. That was completely an accident. Sorry for that. Anyway, actually, I'm not 100% sure if it's actually set in LA or not, I don't think it's specifically mentioned in the show. I did some searching, and according to this article, it says just Southern California, and not LA specifically. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

No probs. I was working on cleaning up the categories. Fuddle (talk) 13:51, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Twin Peaks

Thanks for that last fix. Much improved! ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 16:12, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

No problem, I saw the error, and made the appropriate fixes. Thanks. Drovethrughosts (talk) 17:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I just think we all need to make as much effort pointing out when other editors do something good as we do pointing out when they fuck up. Or, anyway, I feel I need to do so. Cheers! ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 21:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for catching the dab...

...on The Killing (season 2). I didn't catch it when first adding it, neither did the guy who "removed" it, nor did I in putting it back. Like they say, it takes a "fresh set of eyes". — WylieCoyote (talk) 23:14, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

The Wire

Please read Talk:The Wire#Police procedural.--Galazan (talk) 10:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Request

Hi! On this image, it has been requested that the company credits, which, on this, is Global's logo on the right side. I noticed that you have Photoshop from before, and was wondering if you could remove that "Global >" from the bottom right side. Only ask since I don't have Photoshop. Cheers, TBrandley 03:04, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done. :) Drovethrughosts (talk) 12:25, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! TBrandley 14:01, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you very much for undoing my formatting work. Thanks, now we're back to eleven frigging references for a single assertion. Not that those references aren't necessary for a strong assertion like that, but it looks utterly ridiculous. Ah well, I know better than to fight for anything on Wikipedia anymore. Your way is clearly worse, but you're the established owner, and who the fuck am I. --87.78.237.165 (talk) 19:01, 28 August 2012 (UTC)