User talk:Alex 21/Archive 21

Redlink removal script
I am trying to use your redlink removal script at Administrators' noticeboard/CXT/Pages to review/Tazerdadog cleanup list. Could you run the script on that page and/or explain what I was dong wrong? I got a tv tools header on the left side of my screen, but no link whatsoever was added. Thanks, Tazerdadog (talk) 23:37, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Turns out, you're not the first one with issues with my script... I've no idea why, it's worked perfectly for me. However, while it works on my home computer, it doesn't seem to want to appear on the University computer (while I'm studying), so I'll have to do it later for you.
 * Also noticed a tweak that needed adding to the script, given the use of underscores in the given redlinks; the script didn't account for that. The redlinks script should appear under the regular "Tools" menu; "TV Tools" is a custom header that I created that's automatically included in the functions script; it's only necessary for the scripts for television articles. --  Alex TW 06:17, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, thank you. It seems strange that it would have major differences between machines.  Hopefully I can get the script to work somewhere so I don't have to bug you every time I need this script...  Tazerdadog (talk) 06:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * No problems. I'll let you know if there's any advances on why it's not working or on the script itself, and I'll run it at home tonight on the article that you've linked. For reference, the discussion started by another editor who had issues with the redlinks script can be found at . Cheers. Update, script has been run. --  Alex TW 07:03, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey, just an update, the redlinks script should appear without issues now! I only just realized that there was a error in how the script checked to see if any redlinks were saved, which was causing the script to crash on some machines. , this might interest you as well, given that you were the first editor to notify me of the script not loading. --  Alex TW 01:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I already fixed the problem back in February. It was a bug that prevented operation and required an older version being loaded at the same time. It was working weird because of a function invocation being placed out of context, at the start of the script. There was also a function invocation missing from a conditional in the body of the script. My version works on both Windows 7 and Lubuntu, in Firefox, and retains all the functionality of the original script. I'm currently adapting it for cleaning up outlines. The script's name is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:The_Transhumanist/OLUtils.js, and I make extensive notes on the talk page as I further analyze and develop the script. I've started writing a line-by-line walk-through explanation of the entire script's operation, to refresh my memory of exactly how the thing works, complete with links to relevant documentation, tutorials, etc. The Transhumanist 20:19, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject JavaScript
A new WikiProject has been formed to support user script writing, and the development of JavaScript-related articles. Check it out! The Transhumanist 20:19, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

You need to read and understand edits before you undo them
Reverted 2 edits by 2.28.156.9 (talk): Removal of source and valid info of re-used filming location

Evidently, you did not understand at all what my edit did. No source was removed. And information about locations only used in other episodes is clearly not valid info for this article. Take your responsibilities as an editor a bit more seriously in the future, please. 2.28.156.9 (talk) 08:04, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I understand my edits very clearly. With the edit you linked, you removed the valid source named "BBCFactFile", and the re-use of a filming location is indeed valid information to list under production, given its relevance to previous episodes. If you disagree, I recommend that you take it to the talk page of the episode article. --  Alex TW 08:23, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Which location do you think was re-used in this episode? 2.28.156.9 (talk) 08:33, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The information is clearly given in the article, in which you are removing the content. Did you not read it before you deleted it? Also, you see unaware of Wikipedia's policies against edit-warring. Given that you are introducing the disputed edits, it's up to you to gain consensus (another policy) for them after you have been reverted. If another editor reverts you, you will have violated the three-revert rule, and may be reported to the administrators. --  Alex TW 08:45, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * One might expect that a serious editor would have the courtesy to give a straight answer to a simple question. Which location do you think was re-used in this episode?  2.28.156.9 (talk) 09:06, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * One might expect that any editor would have the courtesy to know what they are editing. The Canary Islands have been used for filming in multiple episodes; it is unnecessary to specify the specific island, as they come under the same categorization. It would be exactly the same if two episodes were filmed in two different cities of another but the same country, the information would be valid enough to add.
 * Furthermore, I would note that you now leave the statement Scenes set on Skaro's surface were filmed on Tenerife, one of the Canary Islands. unsourced within the article; to show your good faith in editing, I would recommend that you self-revert back to the stable version, and wait for this discussion to run its course. --  Alex TW 09:14, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * You may not be here to be nice, but if you plan to stick around, you most definitely will have to be civil. Once you can reply to this discussion without resorting to personal attacks, I will be happy to discuss with you once more. Until then, I do get to decide if your posts remain on my talk page, and if I remove them, they stay that way. --  Alex TW 14:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Merry Xmas Everybody?
Alex,

What was wrong with The song that Shona dances to is Slade's 1973 number one single Merry Xmas Everybody. It is not included on the Doctor Who: Series 8 soundtrack. Merry Xmas Everybody can also be heard at Donna Noble's first wedding reception The Runaway Bride. During The Power of Three it can be heard playing on a radio.?

I went looking for what that song was, and was disappointed to not find it. So after researching, I added.

Ken
 * A song playing in several episodes is WP:TRIVIAL. There was also no source for any of the information you added, including as to why the song was not included in the soundtrack. Cheers. --  Alex TW 12:31, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Alex, I was disappointed to not see what the song was. Would not other people want to know too? What edit would make you happy?

Also, what is wrong with including that the song has been on other Doctor Who episodes? Is it not interesting?

Ken — Preceding unsigned comment added by KenJacowitz (talk • contribs) 12:37, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


 * It is not that it is not interesting, it is trivial and it's not necessary to include it here. We're not a fan-based wikia that includes every single piece of unrelated information. You can easily Google the song. --  Alex TW 12:45, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Alex,

You would not be happy with just, The song that Shona dances to is Slade's 1973 number one single Merry Xmas Everybody.

Ken — Preceding unsigned comment added by KenJacowitz (talk • contribs) 12:51, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Alex, you are from Australia. You have listened to Merry Xmas Everybody your entire life. The rest of the non-United Kingdom world has not.

"One of the most thoroughly foreign flourishes of the Who Christmas specials — to pretty much everyone living outside the U.K. — is the repeated use of Slade’s “Merry Xmas Everybody,” first heard in “The Christmas Invasion,” and used in numerous episodes since. This song is huge in the U.K. It was massive upon its release in 1973 and remains nearly as big today. Yet the tune’s pretty exclusively a U.K. phenomenon, practically unknown to the rest of the world. Having said all of that, Shona’s (Faye Marsay) dance to “Merry Xmas Everybody” is one of the most charming bits of the episode and instantly made the character endearing in a way that carried through the rest of the episode, all the way down to her Christmas itinerary, which also appeared to influence the “events” of the episode. And apparently Santa does indeed “ride a red-nosed reindeer.”

http://www.vulture.com/2014/12/doctor-who-christmas-special-2014.html

I am from America, and the song is vaguely familiar. What is the harm in explaining o the 95% of the non-United Kingdom world what this song is? Wiki has pages for Blimey and Bubble and Squek too because the rest of the world does not know what they are.

KenJacowitz
 * Actually, I've never listened to the song in my life. Try not to make assumptions. So, that's the song she listened to. And? How does that have relevance? We're a site of necessary information, not for everything that pops into our heads. --  Alex TW 01:49, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Your scripts
Hey Alex. Have you noticed at all any issue with Twinkle while running your scripts? I'm having issues with Twinkle loading correctly while editing, and it seems to have started shortly after I added your new season list script to my CSS page. I have since commented it out, and tried reloading Twinkle in my preferences, but still not luck. Wasn't sure if this was anything you've come across. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:04, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, it does appear there is a site-wide script issue going on. See Village_pump_(technical). Might be worth a look over to see if you have to adjust anything with your scripts. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:10, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I did some digging myself, and I don't believe your scripts were the issue. It appears they were the three "addPortletLink"s I had. But still, may be good to make sure nothing in yours include the depreciated javascript. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:51, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Nested RexExp
I've run into a problem originating from code in your redlink stripper script, and I was wondering if you might know how to fix it.

Please see my post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject JavaScript.

Thank you. The Transhumanist 11:12, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

(Sorry I posted that other message to the wrong page). The Transhumanist 12:15, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Sense8 Removal
Hi, not really understanding why my summary of the christmas special was removed? I understand why the other summaries were removed, just not this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ok1007007 (talk • contribs) 02:03, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Iron Fist
Please stop changing the page to say that the critic reviews are mixed. It's listed as generally negative on metacritic. Now fan reaction may be mixed (which is where I think you are confused) but critical reaction is clearly negative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18C:8601:AFF4:B4B4:D9F0:F3E5:3D6E (talk) 21:37, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * What Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic say are not the only things used to determine this. The actual words of critics reviews are taken into account, and a few had some positive things to say on the series, that are a balance to the negativity. Hence it is "mixed". - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:48, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Adventure Time FAN
Hi there! Since you are a pretty avid TV editor, I was wondering if you might be able to the FAN page for Adventure Time and leave a couple comments/suggestions? Discussion has kind of stalled at the moment. Thanks!-- Gen. Quon   (Talk)   15:13, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Assistance
This user (who we've already warned) on the Iron Fist (TV series) talk page is now back at it again, but swearing at me and attacking me on my talk page. Any suggestion on where to go from here? -- S talk / contribs 21:47, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Seems like the issue is solved! The editor in question has been blocked from editing for also edit-warring at WP:AN3, where they attempted to remove the report against them. --  Alex TW 23:43, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * , the block on that user is only for 48 hours, so they could very well be back. I think we all feel in a bind trying to keep the WP:STATUSQUO while the discussion is happening and not surpass WP:3RR ourselves, but the user clearly does not know what consensus is, or the fact that they have not achieved it yet. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:48, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I just noticed! Thank you both. It was quite tiresome but I do agree, evidently they weren't aware of what consensus actually was. I appreciate the help. -- S talk / contribs 00:42, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Confused
I'm a little confused by what's been happening to all the season pages. Why should the episode summary be made on the individual season page, only to appear on the "list of episodes" page? I saw a discussion with you mentioned, I figured you would be able to explain whats going on. Thanx Jdavi333 (talk) 20:06, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's not; after all edits and changes are made, the behaviour will be exactly the same as before, summaries on the season pages, no summaries on the page they're transcluded to. The changes will make it so for all pages that the episode table is transcluded to, not just the one article defined by the sublist template. --  Alex TW 22:18, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * yeah I saw that discussion thread after I wrote to you. Thanks for clarifying. Jdavi333 (talk) 22:30, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Prime Minister Hariett Jones
Greetings, Alex.

Regarding the war over the Harriet Jones reference in Knock Knock, I have this to add:

Many Continuity references are throwaways that have little or no bearing on the plot. They are just fun little factoids referencing things from the show's past that fans love to encounter and even search for. I could undoubtedly, given the time, find dozens of such references in past articles that have never been questioned. Ever. Granted, not every item needs to be included, and vigilance against overloading articles with minutiae should be maintained.

As to the Harriett Jones reference, I say "Yes!". Include it!! Harriett Jones has been referenced before -- just look at "The Zygon Invasion", which referenced the running joke about people knowing who she is. That's been a valid reference for years, and the one made in "Knock Knock" is equally valid. It should be reinstated and LEFT ALONE!

Thank you. :)

Ooznoz (talk) 22:31, 10 May 2017 (UTC)Ooznoz
 * Please keep the discussion to that talk page. Thank you. --  Alex TW 22:33, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

List of UK Singles Chart number ones of the 2010s images
Hi User:AlexTheWhovian, on List of UK Singles Chart number ones of the 2010s is there a way the images can be compacted so that they fit alongside the singles table?--Theo Mandela (talk) 15:59, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Doctor Who (series 1)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Doctor Who (series 1) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Adamstom.97 -- Adamstom.97 (talk) 10:40, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Cheers for that, Adam, greatly appreciated. To be honest, I'd completely forgotten that I'd nominated it; now I remember I'd been planning to get all of the revived series articles up to GA status. I'll got through and make the required edits you've already listed soon. --  Alex TW 13:18, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Lucifer S1-S2
Seriously, man, please, please help me to create the first and second season pages please, I really like this series so much that I decided to create these pages about lucifer's seasons. I know that I create without more content is because I do not know the Wikipedia guidelines (and I'm sorry if I violated any), but you can create them with content, I do not know if you can do it or not more if you can Creating will be much easier, because you have more knowledge about it. Thank you very much in advance. Bionico! B1onico (talk) 06:26, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I recognize that you may enjoy the series, but that's not a reason for splitting the articles to separate season articles. Not all television articles needs separate season articles; they only do if there's enough information relating to the season that it becomes necessary to split the content away from other articles. For example, even Arrow only has the first two out of five seasons as separate articles, because so far, only those two have had enough information to split. Your efforts are appreciated, but the splits are not required at this time. --  Alex TW 06:29, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

I understand, I do not separate the articles for me to be able to create the page that has the same article or content (I think that's what you meant), anyway I'm sorry for anything. B1onico (talk) 06:58, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's no problems, but don't be deterred from editing! There's plenty of other valid editing to be done around the site. --  Alex TW 07:03, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

I understand, I can not separate the articles to be able to create the page that has the same article or content (I think that's what you meant), anyway I'm sorry for anything.**** B1onico (talk) 07:06, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

let me ask you a question. The pages of the series lucifer that I created and you deleted, you can easily create them, with images and description? B1onico (talk) 07:10, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Doctor Who (series 1)
The article Doctor Who (series 1) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Doctor Who (series 1) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Adamstom.97 -- Adamstom.97 (talk) 12:01, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Series Quality = Lists
WikiProject_Doctor_Who/Assessment - Looks like this might be where the Series articles being marked as "List" quality comes from. I don't think the example on the project is right - maybe the point of the series articles have changed since the scale was made. Cheers, Dresken (talk) 11:36, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Ahh, I'm seeing it now. I think I might start a discussion on changing that; while season/series article uses lists, they are not primarily lists. --  Alex TW 14:09, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I reckon just boldly change it - it is just an example after all (and was valid once ). I think everyone would agree that the series articles these days are definitely not lists. I'm not sure of another example offhand though. Also "The Waters of Mars" is probably a bad example of the "Future" category - my suggestion for that is an unlinked "Fourteenth Doctor" or "Doctor Who (series 20)" - kind of implies how it should be used without expiring anytime soon - or just remove the example because any example is going to expire. Cheers, Dresken (talk) 20:36, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I found an example of a list, so just changed it. Cheers, Dresken (talk) 21:03, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

List of Scorpion episodes
Well, that was an interesting glitch. What I actually did was this. I even previewed it before saving but that change didn't show up in what was saved. I can't even work out which revision it was. Thanks for picking it up. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 08:10, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I thought that it may have been a glitch. Given that I wasn't sure if you were intending any other edits alongside the copyedit, I thought it'd be best to restore the article, then get you to re-implement what you'd been meaning to do. --  Alex TW 10:46, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Teleplay by
Hey Alex, I'm slightly confused by your objection to my edit on American Gods (TV series), no one else is. It's a fairly minor edit–it's not unsourced, original research, or an opinionated edit–it really shouldn't be met with such opposition like that. The credit literally says, "Teleplay by". On Wikipedia, we're pretty particular when it comes to credits and such, you should know that; we go by what the credit says, including order of names, "and" vs. "&", and the inclusion of story and teleplay credits. This is really no different. If we didn't care what the credits said, then we'd forget the story/teleplay credits and just dump all names credited under "written by". You even created Template:StoryTeleplay. We even note when single episodes use "teleplay by" without story credits (such as here and here), so again, this is no different. I'd like to think you won't revert again. Thank you. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:21, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

For your amusement
Hi AtW. I know that these are wonderfully cheesy but I did have to buy a few of them. If I had a bigger apartment I might have got more :-) I don't blink whenever I look at the weeping angel - see page three for their take on those. heehee. Cheers and enjoy your week. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 17:17, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I've thought about grabbing some more pops, actually - I've actually got the TARDIS one sitting on my printer next to me! Most of my spare money goes towards buying more books, though, one can never have enough. --  Alex TW 08:18, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Television ratings graph
I'm here to make a few edit requests for the template, as I do not have any idea how to edit invoke templates. The graph should be labeled better. Like add "Episodes" under the bottom line, and  viewers in (millions) to the left of the of the vertical line. Also, the boxes that have the season color should also have black boarders. Grapesoda22 (✉) 22:52, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ Episode label, added it as singular, instead of plural, as the graph indicates each episode.
 * ✅ Viewers label, but to the top-left of the graph instead of the left; it's impossible to do it to the left.
 * ✅ Country parameter added.
 * Black borders on the season colours; the legend is created entirely by the timeline extension. I can easily create duplicate black graphs to create a "border", but I can't do the same for the legend. --  Alex TW 11:36, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Black borders on the season colours; the legend is created entirely by the timeline extension. I can easily create duplicate black graphs to create a "border", but I can't do the same for the legend. --  Alex TW 11:36, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Forced line breaks
Huh. I never knew that, but looking at some other articles, things are indeed done "your" way. I thought the line break added a tiny bit of readability, but maybe I´m wrong. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it actually used to be supported for quite a while for readability; the update to the Method of Style was only recent, because it was actually an accessibility issue. There's several full discussions of the issue, at, the RFC right beneath it, and at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television/August 2016 updates/Cast and characters section. --  Alex TW 08:12, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for explaining, and I might actually read some of that ;-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:16, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No problems! Good luck with it! --  Alex TW 08:18, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Please See...
Please see the "List of Orange Is the New Black episodes (talk page)" Thank you 82.44.112.108 (talk) 21:16, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Template:Television ratings graph
I'm really not trying to be rude but is this really necessary? It seems redundant considering this information is already listed in the episode tables. Its repeat information. Grapesoda22 (✉) 00:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Television ratings graph provides a visual representation of the information, especially when there's a great change in viewers between seasons, for example. If you disagree, you can go ahead and delete occurrences of it, but I'd predict opposition by a number of editors. --  Alex TW 01:44, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * What's with the fucked up tone here? I made it abundantly clear that I didn't have ill-intent. It was just a simple question! I wasn't lookin for any kind of fight here! Grapesoda22  (✉) 03:29, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * What tone? I was replying in a perfectly civil manner, even with a valid reason behind the use of the template... If that's how you want to reply, then I think that this discussion is over. --  Alex TW 03:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sensing a tone. Grapesoda22  (✉) 03:53, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey Alex, the discussion i was having on Grapesoda22's talk page was not about the necessity of your template, it was about the colors used for the seasons and how they can be more accessible, considering wikipedia's white background. I simply suggested changing the season's color to something else, but Grapesoda22 didn't agree. Please take some time to state your oppinion here, as this is a problem that could show up again in the future. -  Radiphus   12:00, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I've replied; cheers for that. I had no idea that this was over the colours. --  Alex TW 12:07, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I was going to get to that before I was treated like garbage. Grapesoda22  (✉) 22:56, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

I'll reply with further developments to the template in this thread (given that I meant no ill intent towards, but they would rather escalate this after they started the drama here). I already have an idea on how to go forth with it. --  Alex TW 02:01, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Alex, I don't want to fight I don't want to be on bad terms. I'm sorry for over reacting. I'm going thouhg some rough shit in real life.... Grapesoda22  (✉) 02:02, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Neither do I. I'm legit not sure what part of my original post you found upsetting; my apologies for it anyhow. --  Alex TW 02:04, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Just forget it... its fine. Is there anyway you could add full borders to the graph? Grapesoda22  (✉) 02:19, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes, there is a way, and it's all done! Take a look at Rick and Morty ratings and iZombie ratings. Much better. (Technically, it's not actually a "border" as such, which isn't possible to do, but just a same-height-but-slightly-wider black bar behind the coloured ratings bar.) --  Alex TW 02:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * That's amazing. Great job! -  Radiphus   02:57, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Alex. Grapesoda22  (✉) 03:11, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Extra column in ratings table
Unrelated to the discussion above, i think there might be another problem with the graph. When the "average" parameter is being used and the number of episodes in the last aired season is 2 or more episodes shorter than the season with the most episodes, there is an extra column added to the table. You can see what i am talking about here. Another way you can test it is by going to Game of Thrones ratings and deleting the last 2 ratings (or more) of season 6. I noticed this in preparation for the 7th season of the show which will air 7 episodes (more than 2 episodes shorter than the previous seasons, which all aired 10 episodes). -  Radiphus   22:14, 23 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hey i just wanted to make sure the message i left you above (May 23) has been noticed. The problem has not been solved and action should be taken before season 7 of GoT arrives. -   Radiphus   22:38, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yep, I seemed to have completely missed that message; I'm aware of it, and it's been on my To-Fix list for quite a while. I'll bump it up and get working on it soon. Cheers. --  Alex TW 02:51, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Per the diff you provided, the issue now seems to be fixed. Cheers for that. --  Alex TW 15:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Once again, great job. Thank you. - Radiphus  15:49, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Call the Midwife table
It's great that you came in and re-formatted that benighted table in List of Call the Midwife episodes, but please be sure to finish the job and identify the recurring cast correctly, rather than leaving a mess for another editor to clean up. This is an encyclopedia, and to knowingly mis-inform our readers by not finishing the job is problematic, to say the least. It would have taken a matter of minutes to scan down, see who the recurring cast/characters were, and make the changes needed. -- -- Dr. Margi  ✉  20:57, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Wasn't aware that it was listing all cast, rather than just the starring cast. My bad. (Even if you incorrectly thought/assumed that I intended to "knowingly mis-inform our readers".) In that case, the main cast table and recurring cast table should be be split and separated. --  Alex TW 03:01, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't assume you meant to misinform so much as it was a lack of due diligence. The damned thing has been a mess since it was first built, so I stripped it down to bare bones, and a couple other editors messed with it from there.  It badly needed proper formatting, so that's much appreciated.  It just wasn't finished.  Hell, half the table had cast listed in the characters column.  It's all fixed now (fingers crossed); go take a look and see what you might want to do about splitting it.  -- -- Dr. Margi   ✉  04:13, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

WP:PEACOCK
Please see the link above, which addresses over-use of hyperbole, such as in the reviews section for Doctor Who series 10. The section is brief, especially when the pointless table is factored out, and massively over-states the reception to the current series. -- -- Dr. Margi  ✉  23:18, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
 * This seems to be entirely your own opinion based on the content, especially the table which has remained, which you should have discussed instead of edit-warring over. The guideline that you link me to even states at the start that There are no forbidden words or expressions on Wikipedia. If you took the time to view the episode articles that the reception section talks about. --  Alex TW 23:40, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Interesting side-step; I'm not the one edit warring, buddy. Mine was a reasonable revision, you keep putting the hyperbole back in, and with it, a group of grammar errors.  The adjectives are judgments on the part of the editors putting them in; I took the section back to more neutral language, per WP:PEACOCK, which has nothing to do with the quote you cite.  -- -- Dr. Margi   ✉  23:49, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
 * You're the one who is forcing your view on the article; you made the bold edit of removing the "peacock" words (such a very official term), you were reverted, but instead of waiting and discussing it, you force the edits again. Very definition of edit-warring, buddy. If you want to fix the grammar errors, go right ahead. It has everything to do with it, it's on the very page you link - you can't just pick and choose what you want to believe in, this isn't the Bible. --  Alex TW 23:59, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

File:The Lie of the World.jpg
Hello. Could you please rename this file to File:Doctor Who Series 10 Episode 8 The Lie of the Land.jpg? Thank you. Pedrohoneto (talk) 00:06, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I uploaded a newer image to the latter link; I'll request the deletion of the former image. --  Alex TW 05:09, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Redundant show name
Hello! I hope you can remove the redundant show name in the infobox of The Emperor: Owner of the Mask. Its literal title is already in the lead paragraph. Thanks! 59.2.133.136 (talk) 05:14, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * If you wish for an edit to be made to a protected page, then I would recommend that you use the "Submit an edit request" button. Cheers. --  Alex TW 05:18, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Featured article review/Firefly (TV series)/archive1
Hello (again?). I created Featured article review/Firefly (TV series)/archive1 regarding the FA status of Firefly (TV series). --George Ho (talk) 21:59, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Although...
Hi Alex, although I happen to disagree about the Iron Fist thing, just want you to know that I feel for the position you're in and I don't care for the petulant and irritating behavior that some of the other editors have demonstrated. Take care mate, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:04, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Cheers for that. I guess it's just a case of them acting how they want, and not liking it when it's returned to them. Such is life. --  Alex TW 04:14, 7 June 2017 (UTC)