Jump to content

User talk:Alex 21

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user helped get "Thirteenth Doctor" listed at Did You Know on the main page on August 31, 2017.
This user was a top contributor to "Forever (2014 TV series)" which became a good article on October 20, 2015.
This user nominated "Sense8" as a good article, which became a good article on May 15, 2016.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (series 1)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on May 15, 2017.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (series 2)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on July 27, 2017.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (series 3)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on May 17, 2018.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (series 4)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on August 20, 2018.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (2008–2010 specials)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on October 21, 2018.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (series 6)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on September 3, 2019.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (series 7)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on 17 April 2020.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (2013 specials)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on September 23, 2019.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (series 8)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on October 21, 2020.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (series 9)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on November 23, 2020.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (series 10)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on March 7, 2021.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (series 11)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on March 12, 2021.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (series 12)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on November 8, 2021.
This user was a top contributor to and nominated "Doctor Who (2023 specials)‎" as a good article, which became a good article on February 15, 2024.
This user has template editor rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has file mover rights on the English Wikipedia
This user has page mover rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has pending changes reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has AutoWikiBrowser permissions on the English Wikipedia.
This user uses Twinkle to fight vandalism.
This user has earned the 100,000 Edits Award.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:Alex 21/Upcoming)


Discussions are added to
archives in groups of 30.
Currently archived: 1,419

Citations - All Articles Relating to all productions by Big Finish Productions

[edit]

Hi Alex 21 Just a quick line on how to rectify the situation with regards to all articles and lists relating to Big Finish Productions. With the launch of the new website all references that link to Big Finish Productions will now throw up an Error 404 message.

If we cannot source verifiable sources there is a risk of losing all content related to Big Finish Productions. Can you assist with sourcing references and remedying the situation on the articles. There is a lot of work to be completed.

Hope you're doing well. R2Mar (talk) 22:50, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rick and Morty: The Anime

[edit]

Something tells me by the way you described your revisions that you wanted to instigate me. Your edit description comes across as extremely WP:RUDE.

  • Rv mass edits. Unexplained display of future category, unexplained addition of (2024) link to season that hasn't aired yet, unexplained removal of episode table formatting. No guideline or standard states that episode rows have to have an episode title to be shown - in fact, the standard is once two pieces of information are available for an episode, the row can be displayed.
  • Restore reference and title - keep the director parameter.

These types of descriptions, especially the bolded comments, come off as authoritarian to me, and it's something I don't appreciate. You can undo my edits if I am in the wrong, but learn to be more courteous please. Stuff like this is the reason I had issues with you in the past to begin with. GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 23:45, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GalaxyFighter55 I explained my revert in clear, civil detail. You explained two things in your edit summary, and did not explain the rest of your reverts of my edits, nor the removals of content, nor the violations of guidelines that you are aware of. Kindly use the edit summary appropriately; if you would like a revision of television article guidelines, I would be more than happy to take you through them. -- Alex_21 TALK 01:38, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Alex 21: No, I was not aware of those very specific and minute guidelines. How does it make sense to lay out, in detail, all those future airing dates from Futon Critic into the table but there's some supposed guideline you cannot insert the year in the section header despite using that very reliable source? You also failed to properly explain why the episode director section has to stay in despite it simply spamming the series director's name 10 times. Stop gaslighting and just own up that you could have worded it out better than you did. Also, the category was just collateral.GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 05:07, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some supposed guideline? MOS:TVSEASONYEAR is very clear in its statement of years in the header. The director credit is a valid parameter, no matter it's value, and there is no standard for removing it based on a singular value; see the list I provided at User talk:Alex 21/Archive 45#Spidey and His Amazing Friends (2021 TV series) that supports a multitude of examples of singular-value columns. Happy to help! -- Alex_21 TALK 00:06, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Alex 21: But WHY, especially if you're already setting up exact dates via Futon Critic anyways? They don't provide any valid explanation for this. And if there were hypothetically, let's say 100 episodes of a series, and every single episode was directed by the same person, such a thing would look incredibly ridiculous on a table, wouldn't you agree? And cut the out, it does not help.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 04:44, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't like the guideline, then I recommend you discuss it on the relevant talk page; the why is not up to me. However, you now know what the guideline is.
And not at all. All 89 episodes of List of Vikings episodes were written by the same person, and it's valid to include it in every table; they would be missing vital information if the writer column was removed. -- Alex_21 TALK 01:03, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Alex 21: Alright, but what if there is a scenario where not all the added information can fit onto an episode table (e.i. there's so much information that it starts to warp the sections into more than one line)? Then would I be able to remove a section with just one person listed? You could always just have a note above the table telling you who directed or wrote an episode for something like that, right?--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 02:56, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
More than one line? Like Episode 6 at List of Game of Thrones episodes, where all information fits on one line except the one episode, or the latest season of The Umbrella Academy? It's credited information so it all needs listing. I don't see why sections can't be more than one line. -- Alex_21 TALK 04:01, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, to the point where everything goes over 1 line.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 20:24, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you show me an example? -- Alex_21 TALK 21:15, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Alex 21: Unfortunately, I can't think of an example right off the top of my head at the moment. However, let's use One Piece season 21 as a hypothetical example: if I were to add alternative airing dates, surely I'd have to remove one of the section parameters (which would most definitely be animation directors) due to the table already being too crowded. However in hypothetical speaking, if the episodes were all written by the same person, then logically it would be smarter to remove the writers section since it's just spamming the same person's name over and over again. If that were the case, you would agree with this assessment, correct?--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 23:36, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I genuinely don't see why you'd have to remove any parameters if you added an extra column to that particular article and table.
I would disagree with that assessment, given that the writer is a parameter readers and editors expect to see in the table; however, if local consensus agreed to remove it, then by all means. -- Alex_21 TALK 10:59, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well you see, in my opinion it already looks crowded as is, and adding another column parameter of information would most definitely alter the traditional table structure where you have virtually all the episodes over its traditional format of 2 lines for episode titles in this instance. Instead of having that happen, it would make more sense to simply remove a column off the table that is just repeating the same exact line of information for every episode, possibly with a disclaimer note at the top section regarding the now-missing column, thus preserving the seamless design of the episode table and still delivering topical information to the reader. Of course, this is just proposal I gave for you to think about and give me your own thoughts, nothing more to it.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 03:32, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power episode redirects to lists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 16:56, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]