User talk:Drmargi/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 9

4400 TV Series

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

(Redacted) Anyway, please stop deleting legitimate citations and entries, the 4400 tv series was a joint international co-production as reflected by the citations, what is a co-incidence is that one of the citations confirm BSG 2004 was a Anglo-American co-production! If you continue to delete legitimate entries I must report you. You stated on the 440 tv series page 'Once your edit is reverted, it stays at status quo and the burden is on you to discuss and gain consensus on the talk page.' You seem to be mistaken, it was you who reverted long-standing edits and citations. Twobells (talk) 10:56, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

@Twobells: Your claim that Drmargi is the one "who reverted long-standing edits and citations." is clearly incorrect. A review of The 4400's edit history shows that the content being reverted was only recently added, by you.[1][2][3][4] Drmargi was quite correct in this edit summary. You both need to discuss the matter on the talk page and gain consensus for the changes. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:45, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

I see you know each other and have weighed in defending reverts by a bad faith editor, your behaviour speaks for itself. Drmargi took it upon themselves to follow my edits and revert without debate, I think that also speaks for itself. Why was she suddenly on the 4400 article page reverting my edits? Essentially Drmargi checked my edit history, came on to the article and reverted my edit on a page that has for a very long time had consensus on the fact that the show was a co-production and consensus was reached by many editors, not just two partisan editors who show bad faith. It is inexcusable for a editor to follow another around reverting their edits seemingly maliciously. Twobells (talk) 12:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Legitimacy, whatever that may be, is an evaluative standard, not an absolute, and not the criterion by which we evaluate content. You are taking media sources that report collaboration between a British network and an American network, and interpreting that The 4400, among others, is somehow an international co-production. You've tried this with several productions, each time clearly failing to gain any consensus for your edits. Instead, you pull supposed Wikipedia policy out of thin air, you threaten to "report" editors at every available opportunity, you abuse warning templates, and you ignore your own editing warring. You clearly lack understanding of basic editing principles and community expectations for editors. You're here to push a POV, not to improve this encyclopedia. You need step back, learn basic editorial principles and policies, stop threatening every time you're challenged and adopt a collaborative attitude, or you will find yourself blocked over and over again. --Drmargi (talk) 15:57, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

You still don't get it, you are employing Original Research trying to fight legitimate citations both media and author-baased that's just not on. When you talk about 'consensus' you are talking about you and one other who are attempting to block any other editor editing the article. Only at the very last have I had to report you due to your constant 3RR reverts and stubbornness in not meeting consensus. As for collaborating with other editors, my history shows that until BSG 2004 and meeting editors with essentially NPOV positions we've always worked well together, that cannot be said the same for you according to your talk page. You have been very quick with criticisim and have failed time and time again showing Good Faith. In closing I find it astonishing that you of all people shout that others are pushing POV, jsut why won't you allow perfectly reasonable citations being added to the article? You have yet to show a single legitimate reason as to why these citations and edits cannot be included. As for 'blocking', once the admin understood what was going on that block was reverted. Twobells (talk) 12:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Seriously? First, you were unblocked because you gave an admin your word that you would not edit war again. So what did you do? You found a new article, one that's been on my watch list for some while, and created the same problem there as on BSG, then when reverted, started a new edit war. Blocks are not reverted. Editors are unblocked if they address their behavior sufficiently to satisfy an admin that they will not repeat the behavior. Given you now have four blocks for edit warring and have started yet another edit war at The 4400, it's clear that's not something you're prepared to do. At no time did the admin act on your block because they "understood what was going on." That's not how unblocking works.

Frankly, I'm increasingly weary of going in circles with you. Your sweeping lack of understanding of policy, your inability to differentiate a co-production (a point not in dispute) from country of origin of a production (the whole issue, and one you can't seem to grasp) and your intractable clinging to a fixed position make discussion pointless. Moreover, I am heartily weary of your continuous personal attacks, baseless accusations and lack of civility. Therefore, I am closing this discussion as well as the one above, and request you not post any further on my talk page. --Drmargi (talk) 19:09, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Talk:Battlestar Galactica (2004 TV series). Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! — TransporterMan (TALK) 19:56, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Oh, THAT DR/N. Thank you for notifying me, something Twobells failed to do. --Drmargi (talk) 20:58, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Elementary

There appears to be a misunderstanding here. I made the Episode 11 summary in good faith and kept it at a length that complied with the page as short summaries seem to be preferred. I don't believe you had any grounds to delete my summary, I have broken no rules on Wikipedia and don't appreciate being accused falsely of doing so. If you have the time, please quote sources to back up your claim? As I can guarantee you won't find a single website on the internet with a summary like the ones I write. I myself have done quite a lot of summaries on Wikipedia in my time here, more recently I did virtually all of the Season 4 Falling Skies summaries, and the Season 2 Sleepy Hollow ones. Thanks.86.15.195.205 (talk) 22:49, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Jeez, take a pill, and entertain the idea someone might have made a mistake. IP editors routinely add copyvio summaries, and get reverted. Your edit summary when you restore the edit covered the issue; it isn't necessary to berate me here, too. Your summary is back, I edited it for grammar (there were several errors), and we're good. If you want to be taken seriously, register for an account. --Drmargi (talk) 22:56, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Apologies, feel free to delete this section. I mostly made because I thought you may revert my reversion and it was basically to cover myself if I get accused of edit warring, the rules say to discuss stuff first. Anyway I'm quite happy being an IP editor and have been for almost 3 years as my IP is static, I don't edit for recognition, merely to help out when I can. Thankyou. 86.15.195.205 (talk) 22:59, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

For your enjoyment

Thanks for your edits on BBCA DM. I shared a story from my dim and distant here. Thought I would share it with you as well. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 18:57, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Interesting! Are you a member of the loyal order of Friday Fisheaters, too? I'm about as lapsed as they make 'em, but entirely identify as Catholic. (There are words for that, I know…) --Drmargi (talk) 22:59, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Oops missed this reply. I subscribe to one of the main tenets of Marx (Groucho that is, not the German fellow) that I can't join a club that would have me as a member :-) MarnetteD|Talk 03:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

List of Castle episodes

I think it's time to split season episode guides in separate seasons on Castle (TV series). I don't care what AussieLegend says, it's time to split the episodes on Castle and move them there, like any other show has seperate season guides. For example, ER, The West Wing, The Mentalist, Law & Order & it's spinoffs and CSI and it's spinoffs have their separate episode guide for easy reading. Castle doesn't have that and it makes it harder for anyone to read, know about the DVD release date, production of the seasons and such. The talk page of it is right here. BattleshipMan (talk) 20:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

You'd better care what I have to say, as well as every other editor who wishes to discuss the matter. Decisions are made by consensus and any editor is entitled to join the discussion. --AussieLegend (✉) 21:07, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

You could serve as a mediator on this discussion if you like. BattleshipMan (talk) 21:24, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't intend serving as mediator, I will be participating in any discussion. --AussieLegend (✉) 21:29, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

You are invited to this discussion either way. BattleshipMan (talk) 21:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, that sounds more like an ultimatum than an invitation to discuss. I'll say what I've said a million times before (figuratively, if not literally): what content will separate articles present that the single list doesn't, aside from colorful fancrufty tables and the DVD box covers? Then there's WP:SIZERULE. Burden on you to establish consensus, and that means you'd better care what Aussie thinks. --Drmargi (talk) 01:39, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

TV Seasons

You bullying people into not editing and threatening someone when they are explaining to you why your wrong will never help a situation. A full season refers to the number of episodes no when it airs like you think. Such as limited series are picked up for 8-10 episodes or The following or how to get away with murder for 15 episodes those are not full seasons and neither is a 20 episode order. CBS themselves announced that 22 or 24 episodes constitutes a full season any number less than that is not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whyedithere (talk • contribs) 23:24, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Provide one source that a full season is defined by episode numbers not the period from September to May, and I will concede the point. Thus far, you haven't provided that source; you just keep insisting a full season order is based on numbers. No one is bullying you; but two editors have reverted your edit now, so the burden is on you to get on the article talk page, make your case, and try to reach consensus. --Drmargi (talk) 00:09, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Extant (TV series)

Hi, Drmargi. This is in regards to your recent reverts of my edits on Extant (TV series). Directly from the Plot template's Template Documentation, I'm seeing "The objective of a summary is to condense a large amount of information into a short, accessible format. It is not to reproduce the experience of reading or watching the story, nor to cover every detail. For those who have not read or seen the story, it should serve as a general overview of the major points. For those who have, it should be detailed enough to refresh their memory — no more.". This is exactly the use that I am meaning the display of this template for. You also stated that it is the wrong tag to use - instead of simply saying this, could you please direct me towards the correct template? Thanks and regards. AlexTheWhovian (talk) 23:57, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

The tag you're using is for plot summaries, generally with movies, not episode summaries. I'm not sure there is one for episode summaries. Rather than tag them, the best thing to do is edit them down. I'll check with AussieLegend, and see what he might know. --Drmargi (talk) 02:17, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

EW

3rr template, blah blah, dttr, etc. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:16, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Whatever. Nothing else was working… --Drmargi (talk) 18:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Jimthing (talk) 23:09, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

24 (TV series)

Can you not put words in my mouth. I am most definitely following the rules, as opposed to the other editor here who keeps doing it to HIS/HER personal preference. MOS:ABBR "use "US" in articles with other national abbreviations, e.g. "UK" or "UAE"." – exactly the rule I was following here. Thank you. Jimthing (talk) 17:01, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

You seem to have a POV to push and a basic lack of understanding of the difference between policy and guidelines, which Wikipedia has, and rules, which Wikipedia does not. When you make a change and are reverted, you MUST open a discussion on the relevant article's talk page, not simply revert again and tell the editor they're wrong. Discussions take place on talk pages of articles, not via edit summary or on editor talk pages. 24 has used the American English U.S. since it was written, as is done all over Wikipedia. I'm not sure what your big objection to that is, but you must stop edit warring (same for Better Call Saul), and start discussing reasonably and calmly on the relevant article talk page. I'm going to revert back to status quo on 24, per WP:BRD and established practice; the burden is now on you to gain consensus for your change. Before you start discussion, please read WP:NAU and WP:NOTUS. --Drmargi (talk) 17:16, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Drmargi, do you find it suspicious that the IP editor who attacked you has never edited Wikipedia before, then suddenly pops after Jimthing posted on the talk page? The IP address points to London, England, the same location as Jimthing; maybe a case of meatpuppetry? And seriously, for someone's who's never edited Wikipedia before, I find it hard to believe they'd know about and link to Wiki topics like WP:BOLD, WP:OWN, or "Don't be a jerk". Any way we could confirm this? Drovethrughosts (talk) 17:47, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Ducks quacking all over the place; a check user at SPI might handle it, but I have no faith in the administrative corps, frankly (currently am regretting having supported Sarek's RfA, given his quick application of the boomerang). Jimthing had something around 12-15 reverts and went unblocked on Better Call Saul; the admins don't care if they're British and aggressive. He restored his attack post this AM, which I've removed again, and will continue to remove it. Too bad he lacks the courage to discuss without attacking, much less to avoid logging on as an IP to level such a crass one. Meanwhile, he remains blinkered to WP:NOTUSA in his effort to make American English articles British. --Drmargi (talk) 19:20, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Drmargi, just giving my support to you. You might remember me from the Elementary topic I made on your page. Anyway I personally think you should report him for sock puppetry. The writing style in his posts mirrors that of the IP user. I found it suspicious that within minutes of him posting on the 24 talk page an IP user appeared and immediately went on the attack against you. I've used Wikipedia long enough to know that no talk page is that active that an IP user can view a talk page and join a discussion within minutes. Writing style aside, and what I've said aside, both he and the IP user love to use brackets in their responses, and both seem overly concerned about Wikipedia rules. I find it awfully suspicious that an IP user with no real edit history can be so knowledgable about what happens on Wikipedia. I've been editing for 3 years almost with almost 2000 edits and honestly have no friggin clue about every rule, I'm happy to follow what people suggest. Anyway best of luck to you. 86.15.195.205 (talk) 23:27, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!! Briefly, if he pushes any further, I will. I was looking for a pattern, but you did a super job ferreting that out. You support is appreciated. Sadly, the Brits never bother to understand how we us U.S. versus USA, then presume to tell us how to abbreviate the name of our own country. Greatest madness of all: that article title on this country is wrong. --Drmargi (talk) 18:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I really do feel for you and Drove, you're two experienced editors dragged into this horrendous situation. I've honestly never seen a TV show page from ABC, NBC, CBS, the CW, or Fox use the US term on here. He seems to claim you both are unwilling to listen to reason but you've both been more than fair towards him. It's bad faith for him to forcefully change U.S. to US and then hold a discussion about the change, I tried explaining in my edit summary on the 24 page that he needs to stop and discuss it in the talk page and leave the page how it was prior. Anyway good luck I guess. 86.15.195.205 (talk) 19:55, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to discuss a proposal of year by film release

You're invited to join a discussion here. It's about a proposal about an idea of having film by year articles made and produced by certain countries, such as [[2013 in films in United States of America]], [[2013 in films in England]] and such. BattleshipMan (talk) 06:56, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Top Gear (series 22)

I note the BBC source now used in the article has been updated to say that the next 2 episodes will not be shown and the third may not air. I'm not sure of the best way to treat this, especially since everyone has ignored the {{citation needed}} tag on the episodes. On a related note, I wonder how this will affect non-TV issues. If Clarkson is fired, will Top Gear Festival Sydney go ahead in April? If not, next time we have a referendum I'll be voting for a republic. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:14, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, just getting to this now. I made my first corrections at lunchtime here, when the shyte first hit the fire; a lot new happened while I was away from the computer, so my edits might not be the most current any longer. My objective was to keep the language as tentative and accurate as possible given the lack of substantive information (anyone had a look at Clarkson's own article?) After reading a bit, the status of the episodes seems to vary depending on the publication; the BBC is still saying postponed, as does Radio Times, unless I missed something overnight. I think the most tentative language is the best; postponed pending the investigation of Clarkson's actions. I also think we need to request page protection for the main Top Gear page and the season page, given the spate of speculation and misinterpretation in the last few hours. Now as for Clarkson; the moron won't be fired. They'll get him on YouTube apologizing for his actions, and make noises about him attending anger management training, and the show will be back in a couple weeks. (No comment on the referendum, but you can imagine my biases!!) --Drmargi (talk) 14:19, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

You've done well, keeping the article under control, but I was considering RFPP myself. Until then, we'll just have to watch each other's edits to make sure neither inadvertently breaches 3RR while attempting to keep the speculation and rubbish out of the article. The state of different publications certainly doesn't help, and it's made worse by the fact that some editors are not reading whole articles, just key words. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:26, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! You're right about 3RR. Things have calmed down a bit, but if there are many more issues with IP's, PP might be the best move. --Drmargi (talk) 18:23, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Oisin Tymon

Hi Drmargi. Are we being careful because we don't know, or because there is an "ongoing investigation", or because he's too minor a member of the team, or for some other reason(s)? The source looks pretty clear to me, that he is a current producer of the programme. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:32, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Producer covers a lot of ground, and I've never seen the name in the credits (the last episode having been on here on Monday night.) Let's not rush headlong into adding him until we know something definitive. --Drmargi (talk) 18:22, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

No worries. Only blatant opportunism on my part, just seeking consistency. I'm more surprised we have only one producer, Lloyd Washbrook, listed there. After 13 years?? This is one way for Tymon to get famous, I suppose. I'll hold off for now - I wouldn't want anyone to get "slapped". Martinevans123 (talk) 18:58, 11 March 2015 (UTC) p.s. top on-line anagram suggestion for Oisin Tyomn is "Mini Snooty".

Love the anagram! I think that less is more right now; there's really no reason to remove the name other than the circumstances that lead to his being there and the absence of other names. Once we can compile a more complete list, let's add 'em all! --Drmargi (talk) 19:04, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Better Call Saul

Click the link there you can see that the Information is correct.

http://m.hitfix.com/whats-alan-watching/better-call-saul-creators-on-the-purposely-sh-ty-opening-title-sequence/3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikiFring (talk • contribs) 23:02, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Either source it properly or stop the constant reverting. You are edit warring, and it has to stop. I can't find what you're talking about. --Drmargi (talk) 23:14, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Peter Gould says: "Episode 9, which was written and directed by Tom Schnauz, is to my eye, a really spectacular piece of work. To say nothing of episode 10, which I wrote and directed" — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikiFring (talk • contribs) 23:20, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

That's fine, but it's your responsibility to source your edit properly. If you don't know how, see WP:EDIT and WP:RS or ask for help. But STOP edit warring! --Drmargi (talk) 01:19, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

TG

Thanks for the revert. I realise an edit count is not an indication of experience but why do people with only limited experience always seem to argue the most? I've made nearly 115,000 edits and my edit history shows a lot of time spent at WT:TV, MOS:TV and hundreds of TV articles. When I say something, why do these people immediately assume that I'm talking through my arse and that they know more than me? just venting --AussieLegend (✉) 17:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

No problem; thanks for fixing the piece I reverted, then couldn't get back on my iPad. Keeping status quo is harder and harder these days as newer editors grow more and more aggressive. It's not that they assume you're talking through your arse, though they want you to seem that way; it's that you're an obstacle they can only get over by defeating you, rather than by the strength of their arguments and though consensus. And sadly, our admin corps is so weakened these days, there's no oversight that prevents them from doing so. Policy is nearly meaningless these days. --Drmargi (talk) 18:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm now distracted by the knowledge that you use an iPad to edit Wikipedia. I can't do it, I use my wife's iPad predominantly for SimCity. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:14, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't often because it's so clunky. Mine is for work, and too often, Bubble Witch. Sigh… --Drmargi (talk) 18:15, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

That's a relief and yes, she has Bubble Witch loaded too. By contrast my Android tablet has fun stuff like a car engine scanner, a monitoring app for the solar panels on our roof and, of course, SimCity. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:37, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

All the toys a boy can use. But Android? Pah! --Drmargi (talk) 13:19, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm morally and ethically opposed to all things crApple. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:53, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, what else can I expect from a man who is upside down, with the blood rushing to his head. Meanwhile, the Top Gear article is carnage in the wake of Clarkson's mess. You can always depend on the rabble to keep us busy. --Drmargi (talk) 19:32, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh, if only you had used the word "rubble" instead of "carnage" the alliteration would have been a hoot :-) Cheers to you both. MarnetteD|Talk 20:43, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

The rubble from the rabble has the brew that is true… --Drmargi (talk) 21:19, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

That's what I'm talkin about. Great stuff DM!! MarnetteD|Talk 21:22, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

TOO FUNNY! I just sent you a text telling you to check the discussion. We may have to help upside-down man out with the cultural reference. --Drmargi (talk) 21:30, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

I used to have a mortar, but I broke the vessel with my pestle, just before I knocked over a chalice in my palace. It's probably a good thing. --AussieLegend (✉) 21:38, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh, good man. You get Danny Kaye. I knew there was something I liked about you! --Drmargi (talk) 21:40, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

This just keeps getting better! I could certainly hear DK's voice as I was reading your post A. Thanks to you both for making my ribs ache from chuckling. MarnetteD|Talk 21:44, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

I miss the quality of actors like Danny Kaye. --AussieLegend (✉) 21:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

No kidding. They had so much, and such diverse talent. When he was near the end of his life, we used to see him sitting in the owners' box at the LA Dodgers' games, and it never failed to impress me. --Drmargi (talk) 21:59, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing the memory DM. I loved his appearance on The Muppet Show - especially his rendition of "Inchworm". Another fond memory is when he was a guest conductor with the New York Philharmonic. It aired on PBS - maybe on Great Performances - I wonder if it is out there on the interwebs? MarnetteD|Talk 22:06, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

"English" vs. "English-language" at 2014–15 United States network television schedule

Thanks for your edit. Any chance you'd like to weigh in here? --Rob Sinden (talk) 15:17, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Done. I corrected those article back ten years or so some while back, so consistency really doesn't hold up. --Drmargi (talk) 17:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! --Rob Sinden (talk) 07:47, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

FYI

Hi Drmargi. FYI: An ANI discussion re: editor Peace is contagious. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:54, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I was just contemplating a discussion myself. Glad to see I'm not the only one this guy has annoyed. --Drmargi (talk) 03:07, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

He is getting out of hand... I told him he is officially a vandal. Sorry if this was in violation of WP:AGF but it's pretty clear at this point. EauZenCashHaveIt (I'm All Ears) 03:41, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'd characterize him as vandal, but he's definitely editing disruptively, and edit warring. --Drmargi (talk) 03:44, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have been more clear here. I was suggesting that maybe he was confusing "cookie recipe" for the common expression "cookie cutter", meaning formulaic. As in "these plot summaries are cookie-cutter; there's nothing interesting about them." On the other hand, maybe it's some sort of regional expression in his land. Or maybe something that he picked up when he became a sophisticated 42-year-old. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:33, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure that's what he meant, and I understood what you were saying. My comments were simply to underscore the chaotic lack of communication. At least he's blocked for the time being. --Drmargi (talk) 20:24, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll shut up now. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:28, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Richard Castle Page, CIA operative

Hi Drmargi,

I wanted to ask, why you undid my change for the Richard Castle Page regarding him being a CIA operative? Only his father is a CIA operative and the aliases were also used by his father (even the Reference "2" regards to his father). Please check again if my change isn't justified. If you have a reference where Richard Castle is explicitly called a CIA operative, would you mind give me the link - I really would like to read it. Thx.Ruffy1989 (talk) 10:26, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

The text that you changed actually refers to his father, not to him, although the wording is confusing. It's meant to read "Castle is the son of Martha Rodgers and a CIA operative" but, since it can be misread as "Castle is the father and the son and a CIA operative" I've re-worded it to avoid any ambiguity. --AussieLegend (✉) 11:25, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Top Gear RfC

As an editor with an interest in Top Gear, you may be interested in participating in an RfC that has been opened at Talk:Top Gear (2002 TV series)#RfC: Should years be included in the infobox. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:45, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to the noticeboard

You are invited to noticeboard here about vandalism on 2014–15 United States network television schedule about IP users adding Marlton School on that article, along with other TV show related articles. BattleshipMan (talk) 05:04, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

ANI report

It's been 5 days since the ANI report and there have no opinions or solutions issued by admins (other than one that answer to Helmboy's questions). Should we try a new tactic to get admins' attentions? Or will they finally realize there is an old topic still on going (before it is archived)? I am getting continuously annoyed by Helmboy's attitude and behavior. Nothing than I-know-it-all, I'm-always-right and it's-my-way-or-no-way sides. Seems trying to knock some sense into the user is highly impossible. The issue just keeps getting bigger and bigger by the hour and seemingly nobody cares. I want some closure; that's all I am asking for. Callmemirela (Go Habs Go!) 03:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

You can try contacting individual administrators and making your case. They've let the issue go stale, so I'm not sure how much luck you'll have. I figure they've given us tacit permission to edit war his problem edits by virtue of their failure to act on them. This is the third editor recently where they've just ignored pleas on ANI, where we're supposed to go for help, because there's not enough drama to suit their tastes. --Drmargi (talk) 16:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

There is no evidence that "Madam Secretary" was renewed for a third season. Please wait until CBS makes its decisions next year.

The reason why I removed Madam Secretary from the renewals section of the 2015–16 United States network television schedule page is because there is no evidence that the series was renewed for a third season. Please discuss this on the talk page and wait until CBS makes its decisions about the show next year. AdamDeanHall (talk) 21:15, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

How about you try using an edit summary once in a while so that other editors know what you're doing? The unsourced (by two editors) removal appeared to be vandalism. --Drmargi (talk) 21:17, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk page edits

As someone not involved in the subject, may I suggest you read the talk page guidlelines? WP:TALK. Calling an editor on his talk page "childish" is certainly more of a personal attack than his reference to "page owners". Given that form is plural, it obviously is not a personal attack on you. Rather than violate WP:3RR and run the risk of being brought up for vandalising talk page remarks, why don't you take this case to ANI yourself if you believe you are being attacked? μηδείς (talk) 18:38, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

You too? Hiding behind plural doesn't alter the fact the attack is leveled at me; that it's also leveled at another editor as well doesn't mean it's not a personal attack. Bugs has a long history of this sort of editing. BTW, describing his edit as childish, which it is, is not a personal attack. It's a comment on an editorial choice he made. That's been discussed endlessly on ANI, a place for which I do not care to be fodder. I'll deal with Bugs directly. --Drmargi (talk) 19:14, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

POI

I'm beginning to think you ARE 15 years old. You're edit-warring. Pointing that out is not a personal attack. You had best stop the edit-warring before someone stops it for you. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:34, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Bugs, is it possible for you to discuss something without cheap shots and personal attacks? I've begun to think it's not. Why don't you and your little friends go find an article to edit? --Drmargi (talk) 19:15, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

May 2015

Please do not remove content from article talk pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:List of Person of Interest episodes, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 18:41, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

@Winkelvi: I suggest you have a closer look at the content that Drmargi removed. It contained a clear personal attack (calling people "owners") from a serial attacker who has been accusing Drmargi of owning that article since at least September last year. I've had to step in previously over that editor's conduct, and I'm not the only one who has made comment. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:53, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I saw it. It said "owners". Plural. A general reference, not targeting one person, therefore, not a personal attack. Regardless, talk page comments only are removed under extreme circumstances. The comments removed did not fit the criteria. See WP:TPG for more. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 18:57, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Baseball Bugs has been fighting with Drmargi since at least last year. This is not a one-off instance. It's an ongoing problem. If you look at the whole discussion, and not just one or two posts you'll see that it was aimed at Drmargi. It is permissible to remove personal attacks. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Oh, baloney. I am one of the targets, and playing fuzzy dummies over plural v. singular won't alter that. Bugs refuses to let a petty issue drop, and prefers to take pot shots when the opportunity presents itself. I won't tolerate being on the receiving end, period. --Drmargi (talk) 19:09, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not fighting with anyone. It's YOU who won't let it go. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:20, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Riiiiight. I'm the one who found it necessary, months after the issue that lead to all this was resolved, to come back to a discussion and leave yet another cheap shot. Go find somewhere else to play. --Drmargi (talk) 19:25, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

And you found it necessary to issue personal attacks against me on my own talk page. I pointed out that you and others were edit warring. That is not a personal attack, it's a fact. I think the core issue is that you were wrong about the details of the 2014-2015 season, and that's what's gotten under your skin. To quote you yourself: Grow up. Get over it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:29, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I see far more personal attacks and cheap shots (as you called them) made by you, DM. You both should walk away, but it seems to me that you are the one finding it much more difficult to stop the personal attacks and drop the stick. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 19:29, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

2014–15 United States network television schedule

Drmargi, there's a reason why I reverted those edits because the source because @AdamDeanHall: changed the refs to a more reliable source. Drovethrughosts has replace the refs to not the most reliable source and that's why I've been reverting those edits. BattleshipMan (talk) 16:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

You need to get on the talk page and make your case, not edit war. There's no discernible difference between what Zap2it posted and what Futon Critic posted, and no consensus that one is more reliable than the other. ADH has an obnoxious habit of changing sources for no reason, and you're fostering behavior he's been warned to stop. --Drmargi (talk) 16:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Regardless of ADH's history, there are at times Futon can make incorrect reports and sometimes Zap2it has more updated versions of that certain news. I just thought you should know that before you start question my thoughts on whatever side I'm on. BattleshipMan (talk) 16:28, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Show me the discussion and consensus to that effect. I never seen that, and never seen any issues with the currency of FC. Regardless, this isn't about questioning judgment, this is about an unexplained changed that resulted in an edit war that belonged on the article talk page as a discussion. --Drmargi (talk) 16:34, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Illegitimi non carborundum

Hope you're well. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Invictus maneo. I'm doing well, and hope you are the same! --Drmargi (talk) 19:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Alles gut. Sorry to see you suffering at the hands of the usual suspects but glad to see you're rising above the detritus. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Pfft! It's like swatting flies sometimes. One does what one must, then brushes off the dust. --Drmargi (talk) 23:33, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk page edits

As someone not involved in the subject, may I suggest you read the talk page guidlelines? WP:TALK. Calling an editor on his talk page "childish" is certainly more of a personal attack than his reference to "page owners". Given that form is plural, it obviously is not a personal attack on you. Rather than violate WP:3RR and run the risk of being brought up for vandalising talk page remarks, why don't you take this case to ANI yourself if you believe you are being attacked? μηδείς (talk) 18:38, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

You too? Hiding behind plural doesn't alter the fact the attack is leveled at me; that it's also leveled at another editor as well doesn't mean it's not a personal attack. Bugs has a long history of this sort of editing. BTW, describing his edit as childish, which it is, is not a personal attack. It's a comment on an editorial choice he made. That's been discussed endlessly on ANI, a place for which I do not care to be fodder. I'll deal with Bugs directly. --Drmargi (talk) 19:14, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

POI

I'm beginning to think you ARE 15 years old. You're edit-warring. Pointing that out is not a personal attack. You had best stop the edit-warring before someone stops it for you. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:34, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Bugs, is it possible for you to discuss something without cheap shots and personal attacks? I've begun to think it's not. Why don't you and your little friends go find an article to edit? --Drmargi (talk) 19:15, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

May 2015

Please do not remove content from article talk pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:List of Person of Interest episodes, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 18:41, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

@Winkelvi: I suggest you have a closer look at the content that Drmargi removed. It contained a clear personal attack (calling people "owners") from a serial attacker who has been accusing Drmargi of owning that article since at least September last year. I've had to step in previously over that editor's conduct, and I'm not the only one who has made comment. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:53, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I saw it. It said "owners". Plural. A general reference, not targeting one person, therefore, not a personal attack. Regardless, talk page comments only are removed under extreme circumstances. The comments removed did not fit the criteria. See WP:TPG for more. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 18:57, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Baseball Bugs has been fighting with Drmargi since at least last year. This is not a one-off instance. It's an ongoing problem. If you look at the whole discussion, and not just one or two posts you'll see that it was aimed at Drmargi. It is permissible to remove personal attacks. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Oh, baloney. I am one of the targets, and playing fuzzy dummies over plural v. singular won't alter that. Bugs refuses to let a petty issue drop, and prefers to take pot shots when the opportunity presents itself. I won't tolerate being on the receiving end, period. --Drmargi (talk) 19:09, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not fighting with anyone. It's YOU who won't let it go. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:20, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Riiiiight. I'm the one who found it necessary, months after the issue that lead to all this was resolved, to come back to a discussion and leave yet another cheap shot. Go find somewhere else to play. --Drmargi (talk) 19:25, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

And you found it necessary to issue personal attacks against me on my own talk page. I pointed out that you and others were edit warring. That is not a personal attack, it's a fact. I think the core issue is that you were wrong about the details of the 2014-2015 season, and that's what's gotten under your skin. To quote you yourself: Grow up. Get over it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:29, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I see far more personal attacks and cheap shots (as you called them) made by you, DM. You both should walk away, but it seems to me that you are the one finding it much more difficult to stop the personal attacks and drop the stick. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 19:29, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

2014–15 United States network television schedule

Drmargi, there's a reason why I reverted those edits because the source because @AdamDeanHall: changed the refs to a more reliable source. Drovethrughosts has replace the refs to not the most reliable source and that's why I've been reverting those edits. BattleshipMan (talk) 16:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

You need to get on the talk page and make your case, not edit war. There's no discernible difference between what Zap2it posted and what Futon Critic posted, and no consensus that one is more reliable than the other. ADH has an obnoxious habit of changing sources for no reason, and you're fostering behavior he's been warned to stop. --Drmargi (talk) 16:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Regardless of ADH's history, there are at times Futon can make incorrect reports and sometimes Zap2it has more updated versions of that certain news. I just thought you should know that before you start question my thoughts on whatever side I'm on. BattleshipMan (talk) 16:28, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Show me the discussion and consensus to that effect. I never seen that, and never seen any issues with the currency of FC. Regardless, this isn't about questioning judgment, this is about an unexplained changed that resulted in an edit war that belonged on the article talk page as a discussion. --Drmargi (talk) 16:34, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Illegitimi non carborundum

Hope you're well. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Invictus maneo. I'm doing well, and hope you are the same! --Drmargi (talk) 19:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Alles gut. Sorry to see you suffering at the hands of the usual suspects but glad to see you're rising above the detritus. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Pfft! It's like swatting flies sometimes. One does what one must, then brushes off the dust. --Drmargi (talk) 23:33, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

A bit of unsolicited advice

...from someone who's received more than my share of slings and arrows on wiki. There's always humor to be found. Find it, and you whether weather (see?) the place better. Until then, let me know if I can help. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:10, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Well, ordinarily, I see the humor in most things lost past the time others do, however... in this case, the squabbling, edit warring and general new editor BS has gotten on my last nerve. Thanks for hatting the pile-on thread. --Drmargi (talk) 20:18, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

WP:ANI

Your name was mentioned there. Not in a bad way, but they should have notified you. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:24, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Bugs. It never should have gone to ANI in the first place. What nonsense. --Drmargi (talk) 20:18, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

That's one of the stranger reports I've seen at ANI. Every day is a new adventure. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:33, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Yet again

Wow, yet another person who won't give up on the CSI: Cyber talk page. Referring to the discussion of the guy leaving and it be sourced by Deadline. Don't worry, I'm staying out of this one. I'll just get myself in trouble again lol
DarienLeonhart (talk) 02:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Don't let it worry you. That guy is in the UK, and doesn't know the first thing about American entertainment media, or he'd never have said what he did about the Hollywood Reporter. Sadly, people don't think or read critically these days. If it's on the internet, it must be true seems to be the rule of the day. --Drmargi (talk) 02:30, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm the last person who will believe what is found on the web. Because I never believe something until I see official/legitimate proof. And because I know a large percent of the web is hacker-based scams designed to infect computers with tracking software and/or other types of malware. As for believing everything online... sounds like the "one person jumps off a cliff so everyone follows" story lol. As for me, I am from the U.S. and currently living there, but I know about the Hollywood Reporter as much as I know about Deadline... NOTHING! lol Only because I don't usually follow the news or tabloids.
DarienLeonhart (talk) 02:35, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Drmargi. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 09:08, 7 June 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

AussieLegend (✉) 09:08, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Bruce Jenner

Just an FYI, I'm currently drafting an AN3 report which will address all of the articles that I can find so it's probably not the best thing to revert that person any more at this time. I'll let you know when the report has been posted so you can comment. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:33, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

AN3 report is here --AussieLegend (✉) 16:03, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

That works for me. She's so busy with her campaign to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS that she's not hearing anyone else, even Jenner, who says she's drawing a line between what Bruce did and what she will do. I responded on the AN3 report, and got called a liar for my troubles. I've never seen anyone adopt as adversarial a posture as quickly as she has. --Drmargi (talk) 23:02, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

May 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Mystery Diners. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Drmargi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Hands up. I admit I did edit war on this one. I also know I shouldn't have, and should have used the resources available to me to resolve the issue. I let the fact this was an SPA, after a trail of IP's trying to force the same edit on thin evidence and with no respect for Wikipedia policy, get to me, and I didn't keep track of my reverts. I'll be more careful and monitor my edits more carefully in future. Drmargi (talk) 19:21, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Accept reason:

You seem to understand why you were blocked and will not do it again. I appreciate that other editors can be frustrating, but it is best to try to engage in discussion and then seek assistance from administrators (report the user, request protection, etc) rather than continue to revert their edits. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:22, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Grazie! I just let it get to me, and I know better. --Drmargi (talk) 23:42, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

That's what happens when the blood rushes to your head. That'll teach you for standing around upside down all the time. ;) --AussieLegend (✉) 05:31, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Cute... This, from a man who doesn't know when it should be winter and when it should be summer.  ;) --Drmargi (talk) 05:33, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Ooooo how did I miss this??? Tsk tsk. — Wyliepedia 06:43, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

You were too busy being constructive to be here for the fun. I even got my own thread on ANI when the children got their noses out of joint. Tsk away. --Drmargi (talk) 06:54, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

What, "constructive"; who, me? And you should know you are doing something good to be listed there. I just find it hilarious that a DPhil gets into trouble. — Wyliepedia 08:23, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

It's hell being a grown-up. What can I say? --Drmargi (talk) 17:27, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

At 45 years, 9 months, and 29 days, I don't wanna be one, when the time comes. — Wyliepedia 18:50, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

It comes at 50, when everything starts falling apart. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:32, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Now I'm just depressed. One thing about advanced years and advanced degrees -- we do not suffer fools gladly. But at least we can laugh at ourselves. --Drmargi (talk) 20:03, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

"Everything...falling apart" I can handle. "Falling off", notsomuch. —Wyliepedia 00:52, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm just falling apart at the seams. What a life… --Drmargi (talk) 14:09, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

'Sokay, I have needle and thread, Raggedy Margi. — Wyliepedia 01:33, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Galactica

FYI: I did discuss it on the talk page. Not very nice of you to just ignore that and then point to BRD.

You also threw out the child with the bathwater: The article is actually called Music of Battlestar Galactica (2004 TV series), not to mention the blockquotes.-91.10.26.55 (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Then go back and fix the block quotes. --Drmargi (talk) 16:15, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

So either you intentionally broke the blockquotes (vandalism), or you accept that you made a mistake and should revert it. Which is it?-91.10.26.55 (talk) 22:32, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Neither. --Drmargi (talk) 23:22, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Reading - it's a lost art

Long story short: Somebody moved Port Stephens to Port Stephens, New South Wales without discussion. It belongs at Port Stephens but if it really has to be disambiguated then it should be at Port Stephens (New South Wales) per convention. I made a request at WP:RM to get it moved back but some random editor opposed. I gave up and moved the article to Port Stephens (New South Wales), making Port Stephens, New South Wales a redirect, which I then retargeted to another article. For some weird and wonderful reason another editor then copied the discussion from WP:RM to the redirect's talk page asking (effectively) that the redirect be moved back to the original page. And, he did it in my name! I've clarified in the discussion that I didn't open it, but I've still got people asking why I opened the discussion there. I've answered one editor's post and he then asked the same questions in his reply. And we think we've got problems at the TV project! Wikipedia is getting worse all the time and, I'm sad to say, editors seem to be getting dumber. --AussieLegend (✉) 10:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, that situation breaks new grounds where ludicrous editing is concerned. I read a bit of the discussion, and laughed out loud at the absurdity of some of it. What are they thinking? Vent away, buddy!! --Drmargi (talk) 06:29, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Rizzoli & Isles

Sorry about that. You'd think I'd know better since I don't even get cable. Thanks for the fix.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:26, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Eh, minor matter. --Drmargi (talk) 06:29, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Top Gear

Chris Evans has been confirmed as the new presenter of Top Gear (even though he's previously said he was not interested). How many times do you think he's going to be added to the infobox despite the note that I just added? --AussieLegend (✉) 18:46, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

It just hit twitter via the Beeb a few minutes ago. Buckle up. Are we doing a betting pool or a drinking game? --Drmargi (talk) 18:50, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

A drinking game could be fatal. I've already just had to remove years again. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:53, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I saw that. We'd need AA on speed dial at the very least. I'd say at least 25 times in the next 24 hours, 80% IPs. --Drmargi (talk) 18:55, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Strangely, none of the most recent "problems" were caused by IPs, including selective removal of a quote. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:08, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

And it's semi's. I revise my estimate. Clearly, editors have a reading disability. --Drmargi (talk) 19:11, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm sure I mentioned that reading thing above. Did you not read it? ;) Should I add those notes on every line? --AussieLegend (✉) 19:14, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Touchy…. I was merely agreeing with you!  ;-) I think a note on every line or conceding defeat may be inevitable. Sigh… --Drmargi (talk) 19:17, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Chris Evans

How come you wont let Chris Evans be allowed into the infobox with presenters of Top Gear? He has been confirmed as the new presenter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thursby16 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

As explained in one of the notes that you ignored, we don't add to the infobox until the person has actually appeared as a presenter in an episode. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:43, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Like he said. You're a new editor here. A good tip: hidden notes are there to inform new or casual editors about policy or consensus on problem edits just such as this one. Ignoring them will generally get you reverted in short order. --Drmargi (talk) 17:06, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

I expect you'll see this in your watchlist, but I've opened a discussion at Template talk:Top Gear#Chris Evans. I've also warned the other editor about edit-warring. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:18, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I had a minute or two to glance in, but not enough time to get the discussion going. I did refer him/her to the main page discussion, but they just reverted again. I'll go weigh in. --Drmargi (talk) 05:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

My RfA

Pavlov's RfA reward Thank for !voting at my recent RfA. You voted Support so you get a whopping three cookies, fresh from the oven! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 18:45, 16 July 2015 (UTC).

Perfect timing! I need some chocolate. Sorry it didn't go your way. --Drmargi (talk) 21:21, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

If you have time

Could you check on what is going on here Huell Howser. The IP is on a tagging spree as well as making dubious edits on other articles. I started a thread on the talk page so we will see what happens. Thanks for your time and your message on my talk page today :-) MarnetteD|Talk 03:33, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

I was just about to drop you a mesaage and thank you for tuning up the article. HH was such an institution and a treasure here in LA, and we don't want that article messed up. I'll go give it a good going over, and report back. --Drmargi (talk) 03:41, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

At least this will give you some peace and quiet to check on things. MarnetteD|Talk 04:27, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Knock it off !!!

Plz don't vandaLize my edits on BCS until u have an Admin decide which is the correct format & style ! Thank u ! Peace is contagious (talk) 07:51, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

This is the metric/example given by WIKI-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallville_%28season_1%29#Episodes

IDK if Drmies is an ADmin, but I asked for arbitration by Doug WEller, who is an admin Peace is contagious (talk)

I'm sure between Drmies and myself we can find a way to solve this problem. Doug Weller (talk) 10:55, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments at Déjà vu

My most recent edit at BCS is July 16, just before this all erupted, so I wasn't sure what edit you were referring to here. I guessed this one. Please let me know if I guessed correctly or not. Willondon (talk) 12:23, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I was talking to EauZen regarding this comment. Sorry! I should have been clearer. --Drmargi (talk) 14:15, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. That makes a lot more sense to me now. Serves me right for editing when I'm tired and ready for bed. I probably would have got it otherwise. Cheers. Willondon (talk) 20:18, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Get over yourself

Your mad because I'm actually fighting back for whats right and I'm not going to let some random nimrod push me around. You know I'm right so report me all you want i couldn't care less. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whyedithere (talk • contribs) 22:29, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

If you say so. But might want to pay a little more attention to WP:3RR and WP:CIVIL. They're about to bite you in the ass. --Drmargi (talk) 22:42, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Drmargi is never random and to quote from the article for Nimrod DM is "Mighty in the earth and a mighty hunter." Her hunting is particularly good in finding POV warriors and time wasters. MarnetteD|Talk 01:42, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, MD! --Drmargi (talk) 03:34, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

WP:BLANKING

I've just discovered that WP:BLANKING was changed last year to remove the requirement that block notices stay on talk pages. Apparently troublemakers can now hide the fact that they're blocked. --AussieLegend (✉) 00:52, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Yeah AussieLegend and DM the only thing that isn't supposed to be removed is declined requests for unblock although that is likely to be change at a future date. MarnetteD|Talk 01:38, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Actually it was changed over 3 years ago. This is where I found the text had been changed. -- GB fan 01:53, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Gosh, I didn't know that either. Not sure that was the wisest move, but the policing was probably a pain. Thanks, all!! --Drmargi (talk) 02:26, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

The section was revised again 3 months later in June 2012,[5] and people understandably equate an active block as an active sanction. I've seen several editors have their talk page access revoked since then because they keep removing active block notices. --AussieLegend (✉) 07:57, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

List of Royal Pains episodes

Why was my edit reverted on List of Royal Pains episodes webpage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Royal_Pains_episodes? There appeared to be nothing wrong with it unless you wanted a reference attached to it. Season 7 is a shortened season with 8 episodes in it. I am aware that there will be a season 8 of Royal Pains, which also has 8 episodes in it. If you read the webpage for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Pains, then you would have known it stated, "On November 5, 2014, USA renewed the series for season 7 and season 8, with each season consisting of eight episodes." If you did watch the season 7 final episode of Royal episode on USA Network TV channel then you would have known it stated at the bottom of the TV screen, "USA #RoyalPainsSeasonFinale."--Rskyhigh1 20:52, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

My mistake! I didn't read carefully, and thought you'd changed the infobox -- serves me right for multi-tasking. So sorry. --Drmargi (talk) 21:11, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

More on the QT, please :-)

Save some of the comments about the "tells" for less obvious and more clandestine conversations, please! The tells you mentioned were what clued me in immediately, but I thought I wouldn't bring them up so FF2 wouldn't know to change it up next time they decide to sock. And they will do it again, of course. If the tells are still there with future accounts and talk page comments -- easier to spot and nip in the bud. :-) -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 03:18, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh, those are the obvious ones. There's are a couple unique ones I haven't mentioned. This isn't my first rodeo. --Drmargi (talk) 03:27, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

An SPI you will be interested in

here --AussieLegend (✉) 11:01, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Since I submitted the report Whyedithere has had a username change approved and is now "AllThingsMultimedia". --AussieLegend (✉) 13:21, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

I saw the request for the user name change last night. I'll go weigh in on the SPI shortly. He's trying to avoid detection, I'm sure. I see there was a new fiasco with his messing up an article split. Alex the Whovian will be all over him, I'm sure. That's becoming a problem, too. --Drmargi (talk) 17:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

"Fiasco" is probably an understatement. Somebody prematurely created the LoE page a few days ago but that was reverted. Today, our friend created a season 1 article that just duplicated the existing article. With the abscence of an LoE page, Alex transcluded the episode list from the season 1 article to the main article. It was a complete balls-up. --AussieLegend (✉) 17:25, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh, gawd. Didn't he do that once before? Yeah, he did, for Extant (TV series). Whyedit screwed up the split, and created a duplicate season 2 article, then Alex screwed up the deletion of the duplicate and move to the right page (he claims he did it correctly, but it was all wrong when I looked at it.) Thank goodness some admin or another came along and sorted it out. Worse, those two go at each other like a pair of teenagers on one or the other's talk page. BTW, I've been meaning to ask you to go look at that Extant split if you're so inclined. There's no content; don't you think those seasonal articles should be redirected back to the main list article? These people who split for the sake of splitting are on my "makes me crazy" list, along with the IP's with mania for highly involved progress tables for elimination show and those damned colored cast tables that take so bloody much space for so little information. --Drmargi (talk) 17:31, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

I had a look at those articles today. They have the same problem as the article that he created today, substantially duplicating the main article and with no attribution as required by WP:CWW. --AussieLegend (✉) 17:46, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

What now? And you know that damned SPI is going to sit for a week or more before anyone does anything about it. --Drmargi (talk) 18:00, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Mr. Robot

Hey,

The main character absolutely fits the criteria for schizophrenia. See: http://www2.nami.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Intranet/Homefront/Criteria_Schizophrenia.pdf

Can we add it back please?

Thanks!

That's your interpretation of the character's characteristics. You don't know that's what the writer intends. You need a reliable source that the show is writing him that way. I could make similar arguments for Aspergers Syndrome or clinical depression, but that's my interpretation, not necessarily what the writers intend. --Drmargi (talk) 21:12, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Alright. I guess only the writers can technically diagnosis him. However, the current citation only lists ASPD... it doesn't note social anxiety disorder or chronic depression. Probably should have an accurate citation don't you think?

His character may be on the autistic spectrum -- this doesn't exclude a cognitive disorder. He also may have a mood disorder so schizoaffective may be more appropriate as you suggest. At this point in the show, it's obvious that he has delusions and hallucinations (he sees other people on the street having conversations about him). So it's r/o schizophrenia vs. schizoaffective vs MDD with psychotic features. He may also have an underlying PD and since the link currently cited says ASPD, I recommend putting that.

I don't know what citation you're referring to. Regardless, you're still trying to diagnose a character based on an actor's interpretation of a series of characteristics the writers cobble together to create that character. The description of the character from the USA Network site is very specific: his diagnosis is anxiety. That's all the writers and the network are telling us, and that's all we can add. He's not on the spectrum, he's not schizophrenic, ad nauseum. And please sign your posts using the signature button on the top menu. --Drmargi (talk) 20:15, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Here is the citation from the network site: http://www.usanetwork.com/mrrobot/cast/elliot-alderson It says nothing about GAD or MDD. It does say he suffers from "crippling anxiety," "hightened paranoia," morphine "addiction," probably also child abuse. So this should be changed unless you can find a citation that shows GAD and MDD. Right now the current citation says ASPD. Thanks. Duronx (talk) 23:10, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

CSI: Crime Scene Investigation

Hi, Drmargi, An IP editor just removed large portions of this article with the reasoning that the material was better suited to the characters' pages. I happen to have this article on my Watchlist but I'm not a regular editor on it so I do not know if this was a valid rationale. I noticed you have made several edits to this page and I'd appreciate it if you could look over the changes and see if you agree with his/her reasoning. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:28, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Curiously enough, I just did. I want to give him time to finish, then review his/ her last couple days' edits. --Drmargi (talk) 21:34, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Big news

Morning DM. You may have already read or heard the news but I thought I'd leave you this link of fun news. Only thing better would be if they named the Dowager Countess as the Grand Marshal. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 15:31, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Great minds think alike. I sent you the LA Times piece on this an hour or so ago. Someone tell ABC (or is it AP?) that it's the ROSE PARADE (or the Tournament of Roses Parade to those of us who remember it pre-sponsored-by-Honda). I have a favorite game to play during Tournament week (between December 26 to parade day): at least one tourist shows up asking about the Rose Bowl Parade, and I always tell them that there is no Rose Bowl Parade, then watch 'em freak. But it's true. The bowl game accompanies the parade, not the other way around. Stupid sport-os never get that. --Drmargi (talk) 18:49, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Yep. It is as though nothing exists beyond the sports centric world :-( MarnetteD|Talk 18:57, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Exactly. I love SDCC week and Tournament week, when these ordinary places I go all the time suddenly are the center of everyone's attention. It's so funky. --Drmargi (talk) 18:58, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

ANI report

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (note that I believe you are in the right for the redactions at the CSI talk page but I am seeking a second opinion before enacting) --MASEM (t) 00:58, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, kind sir/madam. I see the other editor is now on hiatus for a few hours. --Drmargi (talk) 05:48, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Reverted some changes you made

I've reverted your date changes on the CSI page. Whilst I fully agree with the changes in principle, the dates you added (Szmanda, 2002-2015) (Dourdan, 200-2008) were incorrect. Just thought I'd let you know. And I do think episode counts should be kept, although if this is a bone of contention feel free to ignore me! --109.158.107.195 (talk) 22:05, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Well, I've reverted back and finished the dates for main cast. Episode counts are in the character article, not the main article. The recurring dates need to be done, but I'll do them a bit later. Unfortunately, the person who did them combined recurring and guest starring dates. We don't include guest dates as a rule (they're in the character article), just recurring, so I have to go look up the recurring dates, which will take some time. Once I'm done, I'll leave a message here, and you can make any corrections -- that will pick up those first two years when Szmanda was a recurring, along with a number of other characters. I fixed the Dourdan typo. --Drmargi (talk) 22:19, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Petersen guested 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013

Helgenberger guested 2013

Fox recurred 2008-2010

Szmanda recurred 2000-2002 as did Hall

Lombard recurred 2005-2007, guested 2008, 2011

Fishburne guested 2008

Berman recurred 2000-2009

Vassey recurred 2006-2009, guested 2010

Langham recurred 2003-2007

Harnois guested 2011

Wellner recurred 2005-2012

How sad that I know this, but I hope it saves you some time! --109.158.107.195 (talk) 22:25, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry about the reverts that I was making on the food network page. I had your user page open and I set my tablet down on the counter in the kitchen and the reverts were being made while I was having breakfast. I dont really know what happened but I think that I accidentally got some water on the screen and that always causes my tablet to randomly press stuff. I dont know though why it would be so specific as to revert. But anyway, sordy about whatever happened on that food network page, no harm was meant. Thanks. GlacialFrost (Talk) 18:13, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Baloney. You've been editing less that a week, have a handful of main space edits and no business operating Twinkle, much less making SPI and ANV filings. You're clearly not here to build an encyclopedia, just to play hall monitor, just as you were using your two previous accounts. The next time you revert because you aren't watching Twinkle, or anything like the mess of mistake edits you've made in the last few days, we'll be talking at ANI. --Drmargi (talk) 18:16, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Im sorry that I offended you. I am not going to participate in any arguments so lets continue to stay away from each other as before as contact between us is not productive. I am sorry for accidentally making those edits and I will be more careful in the future. GlacialFrost (Talk) 18:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Start fresh?

Hi! Just thought I'd pop by to apologise for my part in our somewhat adversarial encounters. I've not been the most pleasant person to interact with, tempers flared and it didn't make for a nice environment for anyone. I definitely don't hold any sort of grudge against you, and I hope we can put the past behind us. I think we could learn a lot from each other! --Unframboise (talk) 23:42, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm perfectly happy to start again, but I also believe that actions speak louder than words. Let's take it one day at a time. I'd certainly prefer we be on good terms. --Drmargi (talk) 23:50, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

actions do speak louder than words, unless of course you want to say something like "watch out for that bus!" - I don't remember who first said that, I think it may have been a comedian type. One day at a time sounds good. Happy editing! --Unframboise (talk) 23:55, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Good. I see The Editor of All Things Wikipedia, uh, Glacialfrost did a diva quit after they called him on the business reverting me twice this morning, just like his sock master. --Drmargi (talk) 23:57, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

I was fully prepared to defend him to the death until he tried parenting me and instructing when and when not to reply. He came to my talk page sometime after to ask me to come back and step in. Alas, it was not my problem - I shouldn't have got involved in the first place! Are you sure he was a sock and not just a bossy-boots? --Unframboise (talk) 00:02, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

That's what both GF and TEoATW both did. I call it playing Hall Monitor: make everyone else behave while being a twerp (I love the sound of that word) yourself. TE was running around trying to get all manner of rights as quickly as possible after starting at the Coop; GF discovered Twinkle as a route to the same thing, after starting at the Coop. Too many parallels, and they're both in CA. --Drmargi (talk) 00:06, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Unframboise, what do you mean by "He came to my talk page sometime after to ask me to come back and step in"? He did not. That would be an untruth. The only time Glacialfrost has posted on your page was a few hours ago, well after your statement above. You want to be more careful, and keep in mind what Floquenbeam said.[6] Bishonen | talk 10:01, 18 August 2015 (UTC).

Hi Bishonen, I obviously misunderstood what GF meant by his statement "Sorry I asked you to bud out, I just wanted Drmargi to calm down. But now that I think about it, chime in all you want." I assumed this was in fact an invitation to return, although I may be reading it in a different tone to which you are. Written text, of course, is incredibly subjective as it does not contain the visual clues present in ephemeral face-to-face communication. Please don't chastise me implying I'm "being a jerk" on a thread I created specifically to apologise for my poor behaviour. I would appreciate any further posts critising me or my reading of subjective text being added to my own talk page so as not to inconvenience Drmargi. Have a lovely evening. --Unframboise (talk) 23:57, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Kate Beckett

You might care to cast an eye over the latest changes to Kate Beckett. There are a couple of issues but I don't have a lot of time right now. --AussieLegend (✉) 08:44, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Will do. Someone added a ton of new content yesterday, and the article is already bloated. --Drmargi (talk) 14:13, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

And then, today, there was this, which removed the episode link and added citations using |airdate=, which has been deprecated for over three years. Yesterday's edits included a "kill count" section, which I've now removed. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:28, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I was just looking at that. The big sections on the boyfriends detailing every kiss are pure fancruft. There's far, far too much detail about her mother's murder in two (count 'em) sections. And let's see. What else... Oh, all her ranks, which were never detailed on camera, and are entirely original research. We need to get at this article with a machete. BTW, do you watch Castle? --Drmargi (talk) 05:30, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't see a need for the "Awards and decorations" section either. Unless they've been mentioned specifically in an episode, or by reliable sourceS, they shouln't be mentioned. --AussieLegend (✉)

Let's deep six them, then. I'm with you. --Drmargi (talk) 06:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)