User talk:Drmargi/Archive 1

Welcome!
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Spellcast 03:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Thanks for the welcome, Spellcast.

More London
(re Spooks) - it's a new development apparently! Hope you don't mind that I have stuck it back in, as the whole line is fact-tagged anyway so it may as well just stand in line for verification. Cheers DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 09:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup all sounds good to me thanks, including the loss of "particularly"! And I am very envious of your having seen the Bond exhibition ... Best wishes DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 11:56, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Episode summaries
I see your name a lot when editing the pages for series and shows so I figured you might be able to answer my question. Is there a correct way to do an episode summary? I just started doing a few this week and I figured I would just watch the show and then write about what happened. I wasn't sure if this could be considered original research or not (I figured no since the show would be the source), but I thought I would ask and see if there is a preferred way. Also any guidelines for length and can they be spoilers for the episode? A lot of the stubby descriptions are very vague and don't actually say what happens, rather they hint at things. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 15:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * In my defense, I only wrote the one, long summary for In Plain Sight, I don't know who wrote the others. I was using the summary for Episode 1 of Criminal Intent that I saw the other day as a guide since the user who created the whole season page wrote it and I figured that that must be the way it is done (I wrote the ep 3 recap). Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 16:50, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok great. I'm definitely a fan of at least 3 sentences and some actual details about what happened. I am behind in The Mentalist and tried to look at the summaries to see where I was and had a hard time trying to figure out if I had seen them or not. They were very vague and hinted at things without saying what happened so it was very difficult. So since you approve of my edited summary, I'll try to make them more like it from now on. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The Next Food Network Star
You are right about Debbie, Melissa, & Jeffrey being treated equally. Debbie should have IN and not HIGH. Snackshack100 (talk) 15:39, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Reinstating the Updates for Kitchen Nightmares
Hi, I am in the midst of gathering everyone to give their comments on reinstating the updates for Kitchen Nightmares. I would appreciate if you come and give your comments on whether to keep or remove the updates here: Talk:Kitchen_Nightmares Roman888 (talk) 07:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

FlashForward question
Hi - I left a note on the FlashForward talk page, asking you to explain why you removed some external links from FlashForward. I pointed out that (in my view) these links do not violate the WP:ELNO you cite, and provided one obvious example of this non-violation. I'd like to discuss this. PaulLev (talk) 22:04, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Possible Bond actors
Could you give a citation for this, please? I know much of the rest is unsourced, but we can change that. Fences &amp;  Windows  19:40, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello
I noticed you reverted my edit to the FlashForward article, and I just have one question, what's the point of having the Wikia template if no one's going to use it?

Americanfreedom (talk) 06:49, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Howdy!
Another incident on the night we were editing was my very first userpage vandalization! I feel like I'm a real Wikipedian now, after laying down the law with some ingratiating little twatwaffle from Australia (IP lookup tool), who kept making the same exact but inconsistent reverts to the Project Runway page. Then he blanked out my awards and PR sections on my page, so Jusdafax and I gave him double warnings. 'Twas good times. Since then, I joined WikiProject Films and have been busy maintaining several pages, including creating a well-sourced article for James Franco's "Howl", which took a lot of work and I feel quite tremendously proud of ^_^.

So, as for Top Chef, I know that we're blessed with several immense talents this season, but am I the only one vehemently bored by their lacks of personalities (save for Ash, who I only wish had the skills to compensate and he'd surely be the fan favorite) and aggravated by the general obnoxious manner most of the chefs operate with? Ironically, I like Mike, though I hated him Episode 1 for being such a misogynist. But his flirtation and ignored bromance with Ash was kinda cute. And at least he's got a personality. Jennifer is easily my favorite though, and Kevin's my second--although I am seriously hoping he loses, because I am just tired of seeing female chefs disintegrate the way they do here. S5 had such a great cast of females and they wasted it with seriously misguided eliminations (Leah shoulda went over Ariane and the whole season would've played out differently). I'll save any further comments I have for later. Your thoughts?--Cinemaniac86Oy_gevalt. 04:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh yes, the noggin is better, but have you ever went to sleep feeling great, just to awake the next morning (too early, as you can tell) with sharp pains on one side of your neck/respective shoulder blade? I cannot wait for Christmas--I want my Tempurpedic mattress NOW!


 * But woot for us being on the same page. Also, I aim to be more frequent with replies, sorry about that. First off, mmmm, Gli Voltaggii. I love the Italian language. It was one of my favorite classes in high school--I dropped French, in fact, when they introduced it to the curriculum before my Junior year. I love French as well, but I excel more at Italian--aced it nicely. My only regret is that I took time off from college to work on my writing (my current life status), so I need to make use of my OnLingo CDs and brush up. (That was the reason for my delay, haha. I wanted to impress with some Italian dialogue, but I'll postpone that as I'd rather be a more conscientious converser =).) Random: I love any noun with which I can utilize the "Lo" pronoun. Lo spaglio!


 * So, from God complexes and enormous egos, to curriculum documents and type-A personalities....Are you, perhaps, a college professor or school principal of some kind? The former, or perhaps the latter as well, might suggest that you are indeed a doctor of something! Whatever your profession, that does sound quite hellish. My guess is it might be a more elitist school, but then again, before I went to my liberal Catholic school full of hippie/gay/combo teachers, my podunk suburban ghetto public school was full of obnoxious cretins both on the staff and attending classes as well.


 * As you can tell, I am a loquacious lil bugger, devoid of the ability to condense. I chalk it up to my writer mentality. It's a wonder the episode summaries I've written were truncated at all :P.


 * Back to TC, of course. I am so glad that you feel as unenthusiastic about this season as I do--mostly because my main friend whom I chat about it with loves it because it seems like there are impeccable chefs. But to me, their flawlessness is utterly boring. I *loved* Seasons 4 and 3 (4 the most), because all of the chefs had real personalities and were capable of sucking from time to time. It's not like Project Runway, where you can judge them on their work. We need the fallibility of the chefs, to watch them stumble and rise. S4 had the best cast ever, imo. I enjoyed the actual, unmanufactured drama; and of course, the femdom.


 * This season, yeah, Jennifer and Kevin are the only ones I really like now, with Jennifer being the one I'm rooting for. Despite my fear that she'll be another female runner-up, She received a rather hefty possible winner's edit right off the bat, so she's definitely a contender I think. Oftentimes, the one we expect to win falters at the end, so I hope Kevin pulls a Stefan (or for some, a Richard). As for Gli Voltaggii, I waver constantly. On one hand, they're both kind of hot; on the other, one is a douche nozzle who seems to manipulate people by insulting them, instigating their anger, then scolding them for getting heated when he's "just trying to help" (although, he'd be AMAZING on Survivor) and the other is just a giant bore. Mike doesn't bother me much anymore, oddly enough, but the animosity towards Robin is tiring. And yeah, Eli. I look forward to his departure and I hope it's ASAP.


 * What other TV shows (particularly scripted) do you follow? And are you into films much?


 * Thanks to the painkillers, I pretty much typed out everything on my mind. Oy vey. Well, I hope this doesn't overwhelm you from replying! I'll leave it at this novella-state for now. Talk to you soon. Oh, and fyi, my name is James. You're probably the first on Wiki to know that. Whoa.--Cinemaniac86Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire 08:29, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Aw, I still liked him better than some. But yeah, whatever. I've pretty much washed my hands of this season. It's official: Season 6 of ANYTHING sucks sloth balls. I don't even think I'll continue watching episodes until the Finale. And I'll only watch the final cook-off IF Jennifer is there; otherwise, this show can suck it. Bring on Season 7 already, 'cause 6 is already dead to me. Phooey!


 * On a more positive note, I'm gathering that you are also a fan of the fantastically underrated Southland? =) If I didn't have to finish last week's Survivor before this week's comes on, I'd ramble on about how much I'm loving it. But I'll let you speak first.--Cinemaniac86Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire 00:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

General editing notes
To be honest, I have to agree with this edit by Rosie. The article lead is supposed to summarise the article, not be in addition to what is included elsewhere. Including the number of episodes, with an "as of" date for clarification does exactly that so it seems appropriate. That it may have to be updated periodically, as you indicated here, really isn't much of an issue in the many lists where the summary is included. I also find myself agreeing with this edit. "N/A" can mislead the reader into believing that a DVD won't be released at all, while "TBA" is more neutral in that it only indicates that the information is not yet available and will be included when, and if, it is available in the future. While I tend to use TBA muyself, many editors believe that simply leaving the field empty is more than sufficient. I haven't reverted your reversions of Rosie's edits as she has previously taken such reversions as validation of her edits, and I don't want her to get the impression that she is right in all she does.

Regarding this edit, I assume you meant WP:OVERLINK, not Wikipedia:Overlistification. While Linking does indeed state "In general, link only the first occurrence of an item", it goes on to say, "This is a rule of thumb that has many exceptions, including....tables, in which each row should be able to stand on its own." Each episode entry is seen as a row in a table, so linking the same field data in different entries is appropriate, although it can be messy. --AussieLegend (talk) 17:07, 6 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I have mixed feelings about the N/A v. TBA. It could be we use the two abbreviations differently than in OZ, but they're more or less parallel and use of one v. the other is a matter of taste. Stylistically, I prefer the dimmed box, I must say. Regardless, I'm not married to one versus the other, but continue to revert for edit summary reasons, until Rosie gets the point.  As for the episode count sentence, it still strikes me as redundant, especially for shows where there are very few episodes and a small table.  I think we differ here on matters of taste and what is important versus redundant information.


 * I do appreciate the heads-up on the gaffe re: overlinking v. overlisting! Thank you for that.  Drmargi (talk) 21:12, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Guy who had his foot run over with a lawn mower as an entry in the list of supporting characters
Longest subject header ever.... anyway, yeah let's report the 3rr violation, how do we do that? I have not done that before. Dbrodbeck (talk) 20:48, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Just a heads-up: Left you an acerbic reply on the above user's talk page. If you're Don and Dbrodbeck is Bert, I must be Roger in this Mad Men task force.--Cinemaniac86Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire 09:32, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I like to think of us more like The Unit, can I be Jonas Blaine? Dbrodbeck (talk) 11:59, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Too much testosterone for me, boys! Drmargi (talk) 19:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of FlashForward (season 1)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is FlashForward (season 1). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/FlashForward (season 1). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know your feelings about the result of this AfD but I think that the close was premature with an inappropriate result. The consensus was clearly to merge to the main episode list but the closer, who wasn't an admin, decided to merge everythng to the main article. The AfD was also closed after less than 11 hours while Articles for deletion says that AfDs run for seven days. I don't follow this program so I'm not going to take it to DRV. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:52, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I too thought the rough consensus was to merge into the episode list, not main article. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 12:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure how this all landed on my talk page other than that I was the last to respond before the premature closing of the discussion and that Aussie and I have been chatting on another subject. I suppose what will have to happen now is that someone who cares to can pursue it beyond this point, although frankly, as badly as the show's ratings have begun to fall, I'm not sure it's going to be around all that long anyway.  I left a little note on the originating editor's (Magioladitis) page so he/she can come take a look.  Drmargi (talk) 16:11, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Lol. Your talk page was in my watchlist from our prior communication. That is how I found out about the deletion debate and how saw that someone else felt the same way I did. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 16:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * That clears that up. It don't mind the discussion; I'm actually rather enjoying it.  I was just afraid someone thought I'd started the whole thing and would expect some action on my part.  I think we all agree that the editor in question overstepped in closing the AfD so early.  But given how quickly I'm losing interest in the show, and that I know next to nothing about a DRV, I wanted to be sure everyone knew I wasn't planning to make the next move.  Drmargi (talk) 16:57, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

FlashForward
Understanding that the show has been put on hiatus, this means that there will by no more episodes until the hiatus expires? Also, aer there any references/do you think there is going to be a season 2? Thanks & happy editing! I know this has nothing to do with Wikipedia, but still =D

Netalarm talk  05:29, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Spoilers in List of Castle episodes
Hi there. I see that you recently restored one of my edits here 1, agreeing with my original edit to keep spoilers on the page. I am rather new here and was curious about the "mass disclosure policy" that was mentioned. I didn't find anything about it but I'm always trying to learn to avoid any problems in the future. Can you direct me somewhere to read about this? Thanks! --Logical Fuzz (talk) 18:26, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Number of episodes
The guideline for Template:Infobox television reads:
 * "The number of episodes produced (a reliable source is required if greater than the number aired)."

There are multiple reliable sources about the fact that 13 episodes have been completed for Southland. Even if they never air, they exist; which is the reason we list episodes produced when known to be greater than episodes aired. —MJBurrage(T•C) 19:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

1989 Rosie/Coral Bay
Just to let you know, I have opened and SPI case at Sockpuppet investigations/1989 Rosie in case you wish to comment. --AussieLegend (talk) 14:32, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

TV Ratings question
Hi Drmargi. I wanted to ask you a question about TV ratings because I value your opinion. I have seen your discussions in various talk pages regarding ratings data, and we seem to often edit the same pages.

I recently "fixed" the viewership numbers for List of Trauma episodes. (There were a number of refs which did not even include the data (show wasn't even mentioned on the page cited!!), then there were some "fast-nationals" mixed in with "finals".) Now I am wondering about this "fix". I personally prefer the daily finals numbers, rather than fast nationals, so my initial response was to "fix". Recently, though, I have found some pages pages which specifically cite the fast-nationals instead (e.g. List of Castle episodes).

I have no idea what you "prefer," but I did notice you were a contributor at the List of Trauma episodes page, so feel free to revert my "fix". As a newbie to that page, I did not, in any way, mean to step on anyone's toes or create a war. My main feeling is to make sure we compare apples with apples, at least. As I have wandered around the TV list pages, I have realized that some pages do things differently and I want to try to "go with the flow". I hope my rambling is making sense, and sorry again, for butting in with my "fix". --Logical Fuzz (talk) 04:34, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm glad I did not offend you, especially after I recently said that Rosie/CB edits like a bull in a china shop. I was feeling bad about it. Regarding the Live +7 day data, I agree that it is useful, especially in this world of DVRs.  I rarely see it though.  Funny you mention the averaging of fast nationals.  That drives me nuts, too! I recently got in-between a war that CB/Rosie was having with someone else about just that.  Sometimes I think people just feel the need to be first to post data, and don't even look at it carefully.  Grrr, enough venting.  Anyway, I'm glad you were OK with my edit on the Trauma page.  --Logical Fuzz (talk) 22:14, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Ratings organization
I'm looking for an opinion on how to further improve the ratings table for The Mentalist as seen here. I made a source column since the info for 4 of the columns come from the same source, but the rank has a different source each week. Do you think I should just leave it the way it is an give each rank its own source or should i put a ref number next to each number in the table? Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 18:01, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't make the table in the first place, I just saw that it needed some help and tracked down a few missing numbers. The suggestions you made make sense and to be honest, I have no idea what the ratings, share, etc mean. I plan on moving the tables to the episode page at some point which will allow me to remove the viewers column from the plot summary area. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 19:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

List of Southland episodes
I thought I'd let you know that I've tagged List of Southland episodes as a copyvio.  The left orium  15:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I'd finally given up on trying to stop the constant copyvios, since the show wasn't all that interesting to me.  I did fix the blinding background colors in the table.  BTW, I see your from Sweden.  If you speak any German, it's useful to duplicate your comments to Coral Bay in that language, since she's not an English speaker, and has very poor English reading skills.  Drmargi (talk) 16:25, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, my German is very rusty. I do know a guy who speaks it though. If Coral Bay continues I'll ask him to translate. Thanks for letting me know. :)  The left orium  16:40, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Rusty is better than I can manage. I tend to alert anyone closer to Germany than New York City of the language issue in the hope we can eventually get through to Rosie (as Coral Bay used to be known.)  She's got quite a history, including a lifetime ban from the German Wikipedia.  Don't look for a lot of well-crafted edit summaries.  Drmargi (talk) 16:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey again. I noticed List of Castle episodes is full of copyvios. You don't happen to know who added them? Regards,  The left orium  19:52, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't, no. It's a constant issue.  Rather than tagging it, let's get rid of them.  --Drmargi (talk) 20:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm removed everything I could find. The rest seems fine.  The left orium  20:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well done, you! What an undertaking! --Drmargi (talk) 20:21, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Back again
Hi there - FYI as you got a mention on my talk page :) User talk:Mkativerata. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * My, but he never gives up, does he? Drmargi (talk) 20:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I must say I am impressed with his persistence! --Mkativerata (talk) 21:01, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I once asked him, during one of his extended attempts to baffle us with verbiage he'd used over and over, if he knew the definition of insanity. Clearly, he doesn't.  Drmargi (talk) 21:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

List of Top Gear episodes
Hi there, I noticed we've both been doing clean up on the List of Top Gear episodes article to get rid of the rumors people keep adding about series 15. My Wikipedia knowledge isn't that great but does the level of abuse by IP users warrant asking for a semi-protection lock on the page? Is that the right move? I've been editing the talk pages of the offending users warning them to not add unsourced information but that hasn't seemed to help. The same kind of thing happened back before series 14 but the people were not nearly as persistent. I'd appreciate hearing your thoughts on the issue. Thanks, OracleGuy01 (talk) 01:35, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Let's not go for the hand grenade approach just yet. It's one IP that's making the vast majority of edits.  Why don't we try a note in his/her user page and a comment regarding sources on the TG page first?  Drmargi (talk) 02:39, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright. I've added a note on their talk page, hopefully it will help. OracleGuy01 (talk) 05:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Fingers crossed. And if it doesn't, you've done your due diligence and can justify lowering the boom.  Drmargi (talk) 05:44, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Southland
Understandable enough, but removing the casting information about Amaury Nolasco and Clifton Collins was unnecessary. I would say I've arguably done the most updating to that page since the second season began and almost all of it (excluding perhaps the part you referenced) was factual, sourced and/or provided relevant information about the show. I'm not in the business of getting into Wikipedia wars so I'll leave your edits as they are. Pipedreamz 19:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem with the casting stuff I removed was that it was only a few words different than the original press release, and thereby a copyright violation. How much editing you've done has no bearing, and a comment like yours will be viewed by some as ownership of the article.  That it's factual and sourced doesn't necessarily make an edit notable, and I felt that, aside from the larger copyright violation, that undue attention was given to the casting change.  It certainly could be re-added in a more concise form.  Drmargi (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

The Futon Critic Estimates...
Actually, the Futon Critic does provide estimated dates, and refer to them as projected dates. Right now for "In Plain Sight", those dates are in July for the 7th, 14th, 21st & 28th. The editor that provided those TBA dates didn't provide the July dates, but rather only provided the confirmed dates of June 2nd, 9th, 16th and 23rd, which are marked "N/A" because (as I'm sure you know) the title is not yet available. But they know that an episode will air on that date. I've yet to see any deviation from this pattern (changes to schedules like this invariably happen to the projected dates), which is why I backed this editor up with the cite. Especially for a cable show like on FX or USA, which doesn't repeat shows throught the "season" but rather throughout the week, running episodes straight through to the end, unless they bow out early and show the last few episodes later, like in the winter (like maybe those last four projected episdodes not yet officially on the schedule?) If you look at the Futon Critic schedule, you'll even note the lack of June 30th. No show scheduled. They know that now. The same thing happened with "White Collar" and their winter return, which showed a gap on Feb 16 as early as December (turned out to be the Westminister dog show. They knew.)  The use of these "N/A" dates is a standard practice for a great number of editors on a great number of pages, even for network shows who do fall victim to repeats, Presidential addresses and hurricane relief telethons. How can it not be acceptable here, where the schedule only exsists to interrupt their constant run of Bourne Identity movies and NCIS reruns? They know. KnownAlias  contact  14:48, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure commenting out a few lines on a table that are largely empty merits a lecture on the practices of Futon Critic of which I am already aware. Futon Critic is notoriously inaccurate this far out; that they don't have episode titles to accompany their dates suggests whatever you contend (so emphatically) that they know is in actuality them estimating/projecting (a semantic hair-split) dates.  And that brings their presence on the table into question.  But regardless, the remainder of the line is nothing but TBA's, and that's too much empty space (TBA being a cosmetic filler) and I commented the cells out as a result.
 * I could strongly encourage you to be careful about lecturing editors as experienced as I am about the basics until you know there's a need to. You assume I am unaware of a number of basic practices I know well, simply by reading far too  much into a simple edit.  I would also caution you against over-reliance on Futon Critic as a source; it's a good one in the short-term, but as dates and titles get longer term, it becomes increasingly less so, and not just because it projects dates and episode titles.  History suggests it doesn't know as much as you contend it does.  Drmargi (talk) 16:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Wasn't meant to be a condemnation; if anything I have a bad habit of being thorough in explaining my position. OCD?  Too many misunderstandings?  Who can say.  If I came off chastising, I apologize.  I just catch details and patterns in life other people sometimes miss (why I lean toward OCD), and I've noticed that Futon Critic's tendancy to be "off" is significantly reduced on cable networks for the reasons I previously cited.  It's why their cable network projections go longer than their network projections do (With the exception of summer programming, I've never seen a network projection go further ahead than 4 wks).  As far as the excess of TBA's - didn't exactly come up in the conversation, did it?  That I can't argue with.  I've seen it happen plenty, and it always does seems like clutter, not to mention an invitation to vandalism. I just wanted to get my side of it out there.  If I'd felt strongly about it (and believe it or not, I don't), I would've reverted you again and/or duked it out with you on the episode talk page.
 * Truth is, I'm a truck driver. My entire participation is only to keep my info straight so I can manage my Tivo at home, and watch my shows on DVD on the road to kill my down time.  I keep a chart on my Excell projecting when new episodes will air (I only need titles to weed out the repeats during schedule changes), and the cable network projections have yet to need adjusting. It's worked for me so far.   KnownAlias   contact  17:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

In Plain Sight
I've been over List of In Plain Sight episodes and the three season articles and given them a good cleanup. I've removed the succession boxes as they aren't needed (the same functionality is included in Infobox television season), added general refs, reorganised the tables so all fields are in the correct order, fixed a few errors and so on. One thing I find really peculiar is the table on the list article. Guest star information should be in the season articles but they contained only partial information so I've merged the rest from the table to the season articles. List of In Plain Sight episodes now provides little to no additional information to what's in the season articles. That said, other than cast information, the season articles don't provide anything of substance over what the episode tables provide. There's really no need for separate articles at this time. A combined article is only 36kB, well below the threshold for splitting. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I started the discussion regarding reverting to one one article on the IPS talk page.  I couldn't remember the word merge (annoying) for a while, now fixed, but I think the point is made. Drmargi (talk) 17:56, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll comment further there. --AussieLegend (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Great - and thanks for fixing the url. Drmargi (talk) 00:12, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks so much for wiping out hours worth of my edits to the Castle TV show page. I did not appreciate your condescending attitude either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nev9600 (talk • contribs) 01:50, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's the risk you run, and something we've all had happen. Nothing condescending about my attitude, just my rationale for the edits I made.  You might want to read up on what recurring characters on TV are. Drmargi (talk) 03:24, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

List of White Collar episodes
This suggestion was spot on. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:58, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Great! I think it's time to start a little campaign to fix a few of these.  Burn Notice is OK, although the articles are loaded with fancruft to my mind, but White Collar is another example of jumping this particular gun.  Are you up for it? Drmargi (talk) 12:13, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Let the discussion begin!  Drmargi (talk) 12:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * This edit is a good example of why articles shouldn't be split unnecessarily and then duplicated. Obviously somebody had updated the main list, but not the season. --AussieLegend (talk) 12:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I did the recent edit, of course, which has been a long-running problem because people don't watch the table and assume the episode codes in the note (which are made-up codes anyway, another pet peeve of mine) are wrong. When I did the edit on the season article, I checked to be sure it updated the list article as well.
 * I started the discussion on the White Collar episode list page. Drmargi (talk) 12:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

In Plain Sight - June 2010
Please I have made the episode list 'simple' (ex. List of NCIS episodes, List of Law & Order: CI episodes, List of M*A*S*H episodes) if you will. All the excess information was moved to a subarticle (i.e. In Plain Sight (season 1)) if you will. The more excess and uneeded info on the MAIN episode list the harder it is to find what you are looking for. It all needs it's own seasons-by-season article. SVU4671 (talk) 01:26, 7 June 2010 (UTC)


 * You cannot make these changes when it was discussed and consensus reached to restore the article. "Making it simple" is not sufficient reason - see the discussion on the list article's discussion page, which includes links to the criteria for a split.  Those criteria haven't been met.  Drmargi (talk) 01:29, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Goran Visnjic
I left all your changes to the article except where you changed after to since (I had changed since to after). I explained the reason why the word after should be used in the change box, but in the interest of good relations with other editors, I thought I'd post you a note. I am also hoping to avoid bouncing back and forth between us. Visnjic is no longer on ER, which, of course, ended. Since implies that Visnjic is still on a currently-running show. So, although I wasn't crazy about the original structure of the article (pivoting everything on ER), the word needed to be changed to reflect the current status.

I still don't like the number of times the word recently is used, but I left it alone.

Thank you for correcting my inadvertent error on the year of one of his films.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:09, 12 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I don't see that after makes it any clearer that he's left ER, or that it's even particularly relevant given the passage discusses work both during and after the time he started on the show, but this isn't a hill I'd care to die on. Recently is a necessary evil to avoid some of the awkward construction I fixed.  Drmargi (talk) 18:43, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

ICA Scoring Discussion
I'll take the action to write up a description of how the scoring is done. Let me know if you have any suggestions! :-) --Cshashaty (talk) 14:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd wait until you have consensus that it even needs to be there. Right now, there's no meaningful discussion taking place, and no consensus.  Drmargi (talk) 14:57, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Email
Is there any chance of you enabling email to you, even for a short time? I've got something to tell you that I'd rather say off-Wiki. --AussieLegend (talk) 12:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Done! Drmargi (talk) 13:19, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


 * That's strange. There's no "E-mail this user" link. -AussieLegend (talk) 13:32, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Try again. I didn't realize at first that I had to confirm it.  I just e-mailed you, and it worked. Drmargi (talk) 13:34, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Doctor Who Entry
Just curious about the edits. Edits made to correct the number of actors who played the Doctor in the TV series. Though there are 11 incarnations, well in fact 13 if you count the recent DreamLord who we learn is the Doctor in the end, and the Valeyard who is revealed to be a future incarnation of the Doctor in the Trial of a Timelord, it seems that the intent is to re-write history and claim only 11 actors ever played the character on the TV series.

In the least, accepting that in The Five Doctors, William Hartnell's Incarnation had his role reprised by another actor would in fact make it 12 who officially played the "Doctor". One edit stated as much but then was edited out saying that was for the list of actors page. Yet this entry contains reference to two actors playing the Doctor and one who plays a companion? How does that rationale work? Authenticity and consistency seems to be by the wayside here. Just curious as to the actual thoughts behind this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.223.222.26 (talk) 18:16, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I have no position on the issue. I simply took it back to where it started before what appears to be a budding edit war got going.  I would suggest you leave it as is and discuss the situation, with an eye toward consensus, before making any further changes.  You clearly have a valid argument to be made, but trying to simply make edits such as your wish, against long-standing consensus, will simply result in an edit war.  Use the discussion route, and you stand a far better chance of getting where you want to be.  Drmargi (talk) 20:46, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Eliot Spencer
I undid your undo of my revision because while it lengthens the character description by a sentence, it is important info about the character's background. Since there is no page dedicated to a character biography, the overview should contain the most important information, and that fact seems pretty central to Eliot's background.--Emgee1129 (talk) 12:22, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I will leave it to your good judgment. Indications on your talk page are that you are an experienced and fair editor.
 * The reason I felt it should be included is that it is one of the few direct details that Eliot has given regarding his background. For example, while "The Order 23 Job" strongly hinted that he may have suffered an abusive childhood, he never directly references this, and I wouldn't include something like that in the character overview section.


 * On another note, I would like to ask at what point a show should start having individual episodes having their own pages. Should a certain number of episodes be produced or is it just when someone decides to begin creating the pages?--Emgee1129 (talk) 19:30, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

The Nigerian Job
I have begun the process of creating episode pages for the show. I decided to start, not surprisingly, with The Nigerian Job. Any help on improving the article (and even creating other episode pages) would be much appreciated.

Thanks.--Emgee1129 (talk) 05:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Don't get carried away. Identify a few notable episodes (I'd say Nigerian, Bank Shot, and the two Davids from S1) for articles.  Not every episode is notable enough for its own article.  Alert me when they're up, and I'll pitch in. To make it easier, follow my talk page, and let's keep the discussion here.   Drmargi (talk) 08:11, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * A dated prod template was added to The Nigerian Job page. Would you be willing to help me develop the page a bit more and help prevent it from deletion? I removed the template for the time being, establishing reason on the talk page of the article. Likely, the same issue will occur on The Two-Horse Job page.


 * Thanks.--Emgee1129 (talk) 03:22, 24 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry, it's been a busy couple days, and I let this get away from me. The deletion of episode articles is often a bit arbitrary, in my experience.  Let me go to work on it and see what I can do.  In the meantime, think about why you feel this particular episode is notable enough to merit its own article.  Drmargi (talk) 01:28, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

The Two-Horse Job
Episode page for The Two-Horse Job completed.

Thanks for the continued assistance.--Emgee1129 (talk) 14:51, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

TGD again
I'm keeping an eye on him and I'm sure that means others are too. He's looking for a response and to waste our time. It takes seconds to revert, longer for him to edit, and much more time to enter into lengthy discussions (between ourselves or with him), so I'm just waiting for him to do something more characteristic to make it clear he's a sock or get bored of us reverting him. Halsteadk (talk) 18:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * That's fine. But at least start warning the guy or he will escalate.  History suggests that.  At the very least, you're giving him a free pass to vandalise and abuse a user name. Drmargi (talk) 19:57, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

ER
Thanks for the heads up. I should've known better, I do have the complete collection after all.-- The Taerkasten ( talk ) 12:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Season 3 on List of Castle episodes
Thanks for your input... But what is considered a reliable source? Is IMDB.com a reliable source? TV.com? TVguide.com? Thanks... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eposty (talk • contribs) 16:03, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

SpoilerTV
Okay, thanks for the info. I will remember that in the future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emgee1129 (talk • contribs) 23:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

User 66.217.112.3
has been reported to Administrators noticeboard for repeated "fan speculation" sections, references that do not support his edits, and repeated usage of invalid sources. Just thought you would like to know. Trista (user Triste Tierra - cannot log in at work) 24.176.191.234 (talk) 22:13, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you! This one's been a problem child.  Drmargi (talk) 08:01, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * "Problem child" ?!? My, you are polite....I had several other terms in mind - all of them "uncivil" in Wikipedia language. :-) Trista 24.176.191.234 (talk) 17:42, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's my generic expression for editors who need some attention and can't mind their manners. Uncivil captures this one, I agree completely!  Drmargi (talk) 17:52, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * "Problem Child" was blocked for a week after I reported them again. FYI! Trista 24.176.191.234 (talk) 17:19, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Excellent!! Thanks for being so dilligent. Drmargi (talk) 18:18, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

The Closer
DrMargi, Thanks for the very, very quick improvements to my notes in The Closer article. I am a big, big fan of The Closer! :) NearTheZoo (talk) 22:16, 3 October 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem! I am, too. Drmargi (talk) 22:55, 3 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Request for help (or--for your opinion, whether it helps my position or not!).
 * I added some comments to the wikimedia page on Prime Suspect, similar to the ones I made on the article for The Closer -- noting that some observers have noted the similarity between the two shows. While not claiming that The Closer was a remake of the British series, I quoted sources including the New York Times and USA Today which referred to The Closer as a "direct descendant," an "unofficial Americanization," or a show that owed a debt to Prime Suspect. Last night, another editor completely wiped out my comments, which were well-sourced, I thought, saying that I would need a quote from one of the *writers* of The Closer, to say that it was based on Prime Suspect.  I don't think it's right that one editor can just delete comments that are factual (and it is a fact that many people have "noted similarities") when they include many references.  I temporarily undid the deletion of the other editor and asked that she discuss the situation on the discussion page of Prime Suspect, and allow others to comment, rather than delete my work as a unilateral decision.
 * Could you look at the Prime Suspect article, and the discussion page, and share your thoughts. Whether you agree with me or not, I'd feel better if this issue could be a subject for discussion rather than a one-person decision. Thanks!! NearTheZoo (talk) 12:21, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I added some comments. I tend to agree that the content does have a place in the article, but you might want to be careful to note that these comments were largely about he first season, which bore a striking resemblance to PS.  You might also want to find early interviews with James Duff and Greer Shepherd, both of whom state PS was not inspiration.  It would add some balance. I'd also move it down in the article, so it follows the descriptions of the individual series. It doesn't belong so early in the article. Drmargi (talk) 14:42, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! I just read this note from you plus the remarks on the Prime Suspect discussion page, and appreciate everything you've said. I am much more comfortable discussing how and where -- and even if -- the link between the shows should be noted, rather than having one editor unilaterally delete everything I wrote, along with the references. By the way, my original notes were shorter, and part of the "undue" weight noted by another editor might be because I added more references in an attempt to satisfy the editor who challenged my sources as "unreliable." I will search for the comments by The Closer creators you recommend, and try to figure out a better place for the notes.  Again--thanks!!!!  It is obvious we both share a love of certain TV programs! (I was a drama major decades ago whose life took an unexpected turn toward a completely different direction -- but my love of theater, movies, and TV is still a big part of me.) Thanks again!  NearTheZoo (talk) 14:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Quick update (hope I'm not bombarding you with too much info). I did move the location of the section and noted the similarity was evidently more pronounced during the early series (using an early 2006 reference to the show as an "Americanization" of the series as a reference). I did want to share the film clip interview I found -- http://www.fancast.com/tv/The-Closer/1813/966634443/The-Closer---James-Duff-And-Kyra-Sedgwick-On-Recruiting-Kyra/videos -- which is an interview of both cast and creators of the show.  It is only an excerpt, so it is possible that Duff mentions elsewhere in the interview that he originally envisioned the lead as a man, but here it is obvious that by the time the show was casting, the lead was set to be a woman. That's when Sedgwick's manager enticed her to read the script, calling it "a little bit like Prime Suspect" -- and that was the hook that got Sedgwick interested, after she had said she was not at all interested in the show for other reasons, including the fact that she did not want to do a show in L.A.  I'm looking for more! NearTheZoo (talk) 15:50, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

You're doing fine! I'll read it all and reply properly this evening. Drmargi (talk) 18:50, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Comprised vs. "comprised of"
Hi Drmargi! Long time no see, since the awful Coral/Rosie days, I believe. I just saw your edit on List of Covert Affairs episodes where you changed 'comprised' to 'is comprised of'. Things can be "composed of", or "consist of", but they comprise. Not sure where I learned that, but it was from someone here at Wiki, for sure. I remember being surprised about it, and looking it up. Apparently it is a very common mistake, one that I used to make often! Just thought I'd point it out to you. ;) --Logical Fuzz (talk) 20:25, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice to hear from you, too! I'm not sure where you learned it either, but my style manual disagrees.  Maybe we're looking at American v. British English grammar? Drmargi (talk) 22:13, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, that may very well be the case...why does English need to be so complicated? I didn't realize that would be one of those type of things that differs by country. Sorry! (But I'm glad i got to say HI!)--Logical Fuzz (talk) 23:14, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It's good to say hi to you, too! I've got Elements of Style in my office.  It's pretty much definitive American English -- why don't I check that? Drmargi (talk) 00:29, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

ER Task Force
Hello there! I've noticed that you have edited on ER articles mutiple times, and would like to invite you to the ER Task Force of the television wikiproject. Please have a look and see if you can offer your expertise with this wikiproject. Thanks! JoshuaJohnLee talk softly, please 17:16, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

№ versus #, etc.
I started changing these because I've noticed they've been leaning more toward this on other shows (such as The Office and others like that). I think it's because it makes the number columns smaller. I thought it was weird, too. Anywhere we could look to see if there's a new rule about this? Kevinbrogers (talk) 03:31, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The problem is # and No. mean the same thing: number. Some IP editor started them recently, as far as I can tell, but when you use them, you remove the label that identifies the numbering system: number by season or number over the life of the series.  Moreover, using different symbols to signify the same thing is never done in published encyclopedias.  Esthetically, they might look nice to you, but they take away information the reader needs -- it's far less important that the columns are narrower than to have the reader able to tell what the numbers in the columns mean.  Drmargi (talk) 03:36, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Sorry about that.  I thought there was some new thing.  As it stands, I like it (I have a wide monitor, so wide columns don't bother me).  Thanks. Kevinbrogers (talk) 03:38, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No apology needed! It's one of those little fads that sweeps through Wikipedia occasionally.  The one that drives me barking is people who put Part 1 or Part 2 in the box with the episode title when it's not explicitly part of the title.  That's just wrong.  Drmargi (talk) 03:40, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Definitely. If that's done, why not call episode 1 "Part 1", episode 2 "Part 2", and so on for the entire series?  Many shows' episodes are just continuations of the previous, so it's basically a giant several-hundred-part thing.  That drives me crazy too. Kevinbrogers (talk) 03:43, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The first editor I saw pushing №/# was this one. --AussieLegend (talk) 17:08, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Part 67 ;) I just thought to say that for a change i actually agree with you on something. № # is about as helpful as & %. If one doesn't know the symbol it actually looks like the heading is saying NO NUMBER and then has two columns of numbers below it. How odd. I do agree with Xeworlebi that squishing tables at lower resolutions is not nice but i am not in favour of sacrificing context to avoid the squish. delirious &amp; lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 17:27, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, our old friend, who also pushes the Part 1/2 error I noted above as well; he does tend to favor moving the TOC to right screen and a couple other esthetic edits as well. And woe betide anyone who doesn't agree.  I find the distorting the table argument a bit precious.  Yes, in a perfect world a distorted table should be avoided, but when it sacrifices information, so what if the table isn't perfection? The purpose it to inform, not to get it pretty.  And as I said above, using two symbols for the same term does nothing to differentiate the two columns and violates every MOS you can name, I'd wager.  As I think we four would all agree: content and clarity come first.  Drmargi (talk) 17:46, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

those Top Gear episodes...
Since you seem to object to my taking a position on the RfC that is outside of the set options you put forward i have removed all of my initial, revised, and subsequent comments. I don't really take too kindly to you refactoring my comment to exclude it from the direct responses to the formal RfC. Calling my comment inappropriately placed when i undo your refactoring is beyond being polite. You formalised it into a Request For Comments and i commented. My interest and involvement in this show has only been the matter of this inconsistency of sources. I do not like the path that appears to be leading to declaring one source unreliable and the other reliable when they are both published by the BBC but noöne else seems interested in my observations. At your prompting i have removed myself from the Request For Comments. Considering i was on your side in using topgear.com i am a bit confused by your response but o well. delirious & lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 14:32, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Let's get a few things straight:


 * First, I didn't set up the RfC, McCrackers did. Please check the edit history before you accuse.
 * Second, I found your comment inappropriately placed (NOT inappropriate) because it addressed the right or wrong of the RfC rather than the issue itself, and saw the start of a heated debate, so I separated the two in an effort to keep the RfC process going. Moreover, your arguments were specious -- RfC is one of the mechanisms used to solve problems on Wikipedia, and branding it as "original research" simply doesn't hold water.
 * Third, it appears to me that came into this discussion as an agent provocateur, carrying around a catalog of imaginary slights and seeing an opportunity. Your comments have been nonsensical at times,  chaotic at others, and rarely on point.  You say you're "on my side", but that's simply not clear.
 * Fourth, factoring is a mathematical process. However, you appear to be accusing me of editing your comments, which is categorically untrue.  I added a heading above your comment to separate the comments on the issue from the discussion about the RfC that your comment generated.  I still contend it does not belong with the comments on the RfC, for the reasons noted above.
 * Finally, it was your choice to remove your comments. There was no prompting from me.  My parenthetic addition was needed to make clear what comment we were addressing.  As I've said before, the rest is your imagination.
 * Frankly, I'm heartily weary of the whole thing, and would prefer we avoid one another in future. Drmargi (talk) 14:47, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Frankly, you left me a talk back for what? To prompt me to not ignore you. I mean, come on. Considering we edit about the same thing and i am not quitting then if you want to avoid me.... Whatever you think of it it is still my response to the RFC. How you you like if i were to have removed yours to somewhere else on the page because i didn't like it? You all objected & i re-wrote it. And again i received objection to it. It is a bloody request for comments and you don't want my comment which points out a fundamental flaw in the request being commented on. Moving my comment out of the section for comments was most absolutely uncalled for. Calling it inappropriate was worse. The first version was a bit much with the bold red. That is why i re-wrote it. If you don't call that prompting then you really need to look of the meaning of the word because those were some rather bold hints you repeatedly gave. Which information from the same publisher is more reliable? When the approach is the consider the reliability of the publisher in determining appropriate sources and an RfC is set up pitting the publisher against itself in a question of reliability then yes i oppose the RfC. Now Aussie won't let me have the comments removed. How nice. I showed up there to try to help. Clearly it was neither wanted or needed and has been a complete waste of my time. So yes, removing my comments entirely from the rfc is completely intentional so as to be done with it. But you do know we still have common interest in shows like Lie to me*, White Collar, Southland, and probably a few dozen others. I just have no interest at all in Top Gear and only wanted to ensure the info in the episode list would be accurate once the dust settled. delirious &amp; lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 16:19, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Ghost Hunters International
The flags are organized by nations because it's an International show. Scotland, Wales and England are all part of the United Kingdom they are not separate nations. Just like Queensland and Tasmania are all part of Australia. Puerto Rico is part of the US. They are NOT separate nations. How it's listed in the description is going by what was shown on television. Besides more people are going to recognize the British National Flag before they recognize the Flag of England  Cyberia23 (talk) 15:05, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * There's no hard and fast rules for these things. You probably should read up on the UK and on Puerto Rico.  The UK is a unitary state typing four independent nations (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) together into a constitutional monarchy.  The are four independent nations with one centralized government, and in the case of Scotland and Northern Ireland, devolved national governments.  It's a long way from as simple as their being one nation.  The flags are discretionary:  the individual countries fly their own flags, and the Union Flag represents the union: the independent countries under one flag.  In the article, you're talking about the individual countries, and their national flags are, to my mind at least, more appropriate.  I'm happy to open a discussion regarding the flags if that's more likely to keep them in place.


 * I don't agree that readers are more likely to recognize the Union flag than the individual national flags. Moreover, if they need to, the flags are decorative, and someone's going to get rid of them -- it happens all the time.  On the other hand, if you argue that the use of the flags is informative, (oh, that's what the Scottish flag looks like!) they have a function that justifies both the individual national flags and retention of the flags, period.

Also, when I first created this article, and added to it as the show went on, I added individual flags for Wales and Scotland once and some kept switching them to UK with the argument that they weren't separate nations. Although they'd like to be, they aren't. It later made sense to me so I left it that way. I'm not sure about Puerto Rico, I consider them US territory, They use US Currency, they get US tax breaks and incentives and yadda yadda. They don't want to be state because they'll lose all their freebie kudos. Cyberia23 (talk) 15:15, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Puerto Rico is different from the UK. Puerto Rico is a territory, not an American state, which use of the American flag implies.  It has its own flag; the US flag does not and should not replace it (same for the Mariana Islands and at one time, the Philippines).  All the governmental jazz doesn't govern whether PR flies the US flag - US Flag Code does.  The US flag is used to represent Puerto Rico's connection to the US (in other words, the territorial relationship) and American entities in Puerto Rico (such as US government offices), but representation of Puerto Rico as a country requires use of the Puerto Rican flag.  And you see that done all over Wikipedia.

Another thing, if you're going call me out on something at least have the courtesy of doing on my talk page, instead of another user's. Thank you. Cyberia23 (talk) 15:22, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * And you're right there. I should at least have give you a talkback on your talkpage.  For that, I apologize.  Drmargi (talk) 18:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

You wrote: "Whoa! Puerto Rico is an associated territory, but is not an American state, and it does not use the American flag. It has its own flag, which should be displayed. Check the article here in the Wikipedia." Drmargi (talk) 13:44, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I had nothing to do with this and agree that Puerto Rico is not an American state, that's why I put the Puerto Rican flag icon. However I believe it was changed back by the creator of the page (Cyberia23), so you should direct all you "talk" conments to this user as he/she has done with me. Clearly this user does not want to use flags of the countries themselves and reverted all my England, Scotland, and Wales flags to United Kingdom flags, its Cyberia23's page so I cannot change them back. Next time, please check the user history on who edited the page. But I do agree at least PR should have its own flage represented! Sue Kastle (talk), 15:22, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry; I had a brain cramp and replied the wrong place, so just ignore or delete my comments. No sweat there.  I realize we're on the same page regarding PR (which is now correct) and the UK countries; my comments were directed at Cyberia23, which is why they were subordinated under his/her posting.  Actually, you can change them back as long as you don't violate WP:3RR or start an edit war -- articles don't have owners (see WP:OWN), so Cyberia23 has no final say in the matter.  I wonder if we want to initiate a discussion on the article talk page given we're in agreement.  The Union Flag doesn't represent the individual countries but rather the union, and is arguably used inappropriately in this context.  What do you think?  Drmargi (talk) 20:51, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * That is no problem, Drmargi, I figured you had the wrong editor. I wrote to Cyberia23 also thinking it was this user who created the entry page: I wanted all the countries to have their own flags, I didn't realized this user wanted it to be "national" flags. I did change all the UK flags because I thought it would be better to represent individual countries of the UK: England, Scotland, and Wales, which I know make up the United Kingdom, but I was trying to show each nation's flags. But for some reason Cyberia23 wants "national flags" quoting Ghost Hunters is "InterNATIONAL" and wants international flags to be easier for American viewers to indenitfy with the UK flag. I also changed the Anerican flag someone had next to Puerto Rico, which is not an American state, but their own country. I am still new to the "rules" of Wikipedia (I have only started editing as a registered user since Oct 2010) and will respect Cyberia23's wishes, but I don't agree with them. I don't want an "edit war" but I wonder how all can come to an agreement of just putting each country's own individual flag, not the entire nation's like the UK... Sue Kastle (talk) 16:12, 28 January 2011.


 * Oh, I'm sorry. I can't help myself, I have to correct you all. I presume that none of you are British? Okay, well first of it's the United Kingdoms of Great Britain, Northern Ireland, Eire, the Shetland, Orkney and Channel Islands and of Her Majesty's Royal British Empire the Commonwealth. Got it? No. Okay, Great Britain is England, Scotlant, Wales. The United Kingdom should actually be the United Kingdoms (plural) and includes those three countries plus Northern Ireland (a State of Great Britain; but separate) as well as the Republic of Ireland (Eire, a separate country but one which still takes the British Monarchy) as well as all the Territorial Islands (Channel by France and Shetland & Orkney off Scotland) and then the remaining Empire Commonwealth (Australia etc). Then, the 'British' flag you refer to combines the four states (which at the time of inauguration was England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland) and is called the Union Flag. It is known more commonly as the Union Jack but this is not it's actual name unless flown at sea. The 'English flag' you refer to is actually called the St. George's Cross, and represents England as a nation under it's Patron Saint: George of Palestine. Again, sorry, but I seriously loathe American inaccuracies when it comes to all things British, and you may be reading this when it wasn't even you who made such mistakes. --Tropzax (talk) 20:57, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

spell checker
i would love to one problem...... when it gives you list of 5 or 6 words i dnt have clue which one is right, and a lot of the time it doesn't know what i am typing, small words it works fine for and i generally use it but anything over 3 syballels they fail because i aint just dyslexic i also have speech problems which actually affect my ability to spell phyntacially and without that ia m screwed, this has been spelled checked and it still got plenty of error-- Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 19:58, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

The First White Stig
I think the title should be The First White Stig (Sacked Stig), as when people see the title all the information is conveyed as that is what the people on the show call First White Stig. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilee (talk • contribs) 17:55, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikiquette alerts
I have amended the complaint filed against me to name yourself as a co-accused by myself, mostly for creating the side-discussion about me at Aussie's talk page when you had just told me "it's very poor form, and quite uncivil, to discuss a user not part of a discussion in that discussion". delirious & lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 09:19, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I am not looking to be a pain but given this larger issue is about misunderstanding of acceptable retraction of comments i am not really sure what you are asking for on that page by simply saying to abide by the policy. If you want to leave me an example that would probably be for the best. Do also keep in mind that i have been asking the same of you on that other page and you have outright refused for a few weeks now. I am willing but i don't want to make it worse by doing it through striking if you want names removed or another permitted option per the policy because that is what the issue is about in the first place, my following your example and then it not being acceptable and massively blowing up from there. I would prefer to get it right the first time and move on to more pleasant things. <font color="#ff69b4">delirious &amp; <font color="#ff69b4">lost  ☯ ~hugs~
 * I have noticed that Aussie has deemed me not welcome in the discussion about me on his talk page. I have added it to the complaint and made a request on Aussie's talk page that all mention of me be removed per your own standard of not being mentioned in a discussion you are not part of and not welcome to participate in. That would mean entirely removing all mention of me and continuing the secondary conversation about SAG on as you wish with a section heading that doesn't name me. For making this a 3rd message i do apologies but i am having a bit of trouble keeping track of everything right now and as i notice them i mention them. <font face="Georgia"><font color="#ff69b4">delirious &amp; <font color="#ff69b4">lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 10:35, 19 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I have reverted Deliriousandlost's change of name. Since it's "my" complaint and it was about her actions at a specific page, it's inappropriate after more than 3 weeks and 9,500 words to amend a complaint, especially by the complainee. If she persists in such disruptive action I'll take it to ANI myself. The discussion on my talk page will remain. If anybody wants to retract their comments by striking them through, they're welcome to do so. --AussieLegend (talk) 10:58, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'll deal with the above in due course -- it's very early Saturday morning here, and I have other fish to fry for most of the day.  Drmargi (talk) 14:09, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: Incivility
I willingly apologize for the incivility, it was in bad taste. However, since you are the one constantly redoing my edits, I question why you feel it necessary to police the page as such. To look at the history of my edits on the Leverage page, you will notice that while the first round may have indeed been excessive, the second edit was noticeably shorter and was intended mostly to take out what I considered to be confusing and inelegant writing, such as replacing "catching the bad guys" with "making major arrests". These are effectively cosmetic changes and it frustrated me to see them taken down so rapidly. I feel that it is necessary to note that Taggert and McSweeten are incompetent (the way the paragraph is written now, this is not implicit), and that Nate and Maggie's marriage ended just as much because of Sam's death as Nate's alcoholism. If you feel that is excessive, would you mind explaining why? - Ringkichardthethird (talk) 1:05, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the apology. The problem is your use of subjective (or in Wikipedia shorthand, POV) language.  You see Taggert and McSweeten as incompetent.  I don't agree; they're a little inept, and have benefitted from the Leverage team, to be sure, but we've never seen anything to suggest incompetence.  Thus, my removal of the WP:POV use of incompetence.  You also described McSweeten as having a "major" (I think it was) crush on Parker; again, this is POV.  What is major?  It's too subjective to be encyclopedic in this context.  Equally problematic was the description of Sophie as possibly British (r)oyalty.  The show told us she ran a long con as a fake Duchess, but royalty?  That wasn't remotely suggested, although the show did misuse the term royalty when it came to titles such as Duchess.  It left an open question about Sophie's origins, but any speculation about that is not appropriate here, where it might be on a fansite.


 * I would be careful about accusing me, or anyone else, of "policing" a page. Editors take varying degrees of interest in given articles, and you tend to see the same editors more frequently on certain pages.  It's easy to throw around terms like policing or owning an article, but very, very difficult to prove.  Moreover, the guiding assumption around here is one of good faith -- we assume editors act to improve the article, not for personal or other reasons.  I agree with your point regarding the inelegant writing in the descriptions of some of the characters, catching the bad guys being among the more problematic phrases, but you need to temper your editing with awareness of a few basic guidelines.  Drmargi (talk) 23:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Sneak preview vs. series beginning dates
Hi, Drmargie, Some time ago you and I discussed the issue of comparisons between Prime Subject and The Chosen, and I saw you as someone with a lot of expertises regarding television programming (among other issues). I have been working on the page for Camelot (TV series) and have had a number of edits reverted by another editor -- and have tried to learn from his/her reverts, avoiding wars or outright disagreements. (Although I just asked if he/she might throw in the phrase "good faith" once in awhile when he/she reverts what I've written.) :) In any event, I was curious about one issue, which is the beginning date of a series when the network airs a "sneak preview" of the show more than a month before the scheduled start.  For Camelot, Starz advertises that it is scheduled to begin April 1, also advertising that a special Feb 25 airing of the first episode was a "sneak preview." (See http://www.starz.com/originals/Camelot/Episode101).  In the infobox, the question about which I'm disagreeing is that the other editor wants "original run" to read: February 25, 2011 - present.  I think it should read: First episode preview aired February 25, 2011; Series scheduled to begin April 1, 2011.  (Then, after April 1, change to "April 1, 2011-present; First episode preview aired February 25, 2011." Since the discussion so far has been between me and one other editor, I was curious what you think. I'll look here for the answer! Best wishes, NearTheZoo (talk) 16:15, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: Editing writing of other editors on talk pages.
I am sorry about that. I see now that I should not have done it, and thought about it more before executing that action. SilvestertheCat (talk) 08:30, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

List of White Collar characters
As someone who has worked on various USA shows in the past, including this one, I assume you are fairly knowledgable about the subject. I've been working on an article for a list of White Collar characters, which can be found here. I've decided it's about time to make one, as many other character lists have been made about shows in the past (some at much earlier points in the show, such as the Royal Pains character list) and have done fairly well. Any contributions or tips you may have would be welcome. Thank you, Kevinbrogers (talk) 03:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks good so far. I'll keep an eye on it as it progresses; let me know if you want me to read/edit/comment at any specific time.  Otherwise, I'll communicate with you about it rather than messing with the article itself.  One thing did jump out at me:  you need to be consistent with the main article in terms of describing main v. recurring characters.  Billing isn't the only measure, and is often determined less by the nature of the role than by the idiocies of a SAG contract.  Sharif Atkins is clearly a main character, as was discussed earlier, whereas Natalie Morales was never more than a recurring character, which is reflected in the table (and discussed on the talk page.)  Aside from that, you're good to go for now! Drmargi (talk) 04:45, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll switch those. I was going off billing on the show, but I see now that the main page is a bit different (and rightly so).  Thanks! Kevinbrogers (talk) 04:48, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Kevin, what's the status of this article at present? I've got the same message from Daily Editor as you do. I'd hate to see the two of you working at cross-purposes on the same project. I know you've put a lot of work in, and I don't want to encourage DE to do what you've already done when collaboration would be a better option. Drmargi (talk) 06:18, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I sent DE a message informing him/her of my article, and suggested that we collaborate on the article. While I have the outline drawn up, DE has two of the actual descriptions written, so I don't think there should be any problems. Kevinbrogers (talk) 15:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Kitchen Nightmares
I semi-protected the article for now. Garion96 (talk) 09:34, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Burn, baby, burn
Take it out. Not a big deal. <font color="#1034A6"> TREKphiler <font color="#1034A6">any time you're ready, Uhura 05:49, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Another editor already did. I'm surprised someone who helps newbies wouldn't know that kind of post doesn't go on the talk page.Drmargi (talk) 05:59, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * It's been a long day. :( <font color="#1034A6"> TREKphiler  <font color="#1034A6">any time you're ready, Uhura 06:12, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I can seriously relate to that. Ah, well.  Tempest in a teapot, and not much of one at that.  Drmargi (talk) 06:22, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

AIV
Your report was stale, the user had not edited in over four hours. Dreadstar ☥  03:58, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The user is in the UK, and I'm in the US (west coast). There's bound to be a disparity.  Four hours is far from what I'd term stale, particularly under the circumstances.  Drmargi (talk) 04:13, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * If you look at the instructions on WP:AIV, it says "3. Unregistered users must be active now", and four hours doesn't fit that timeframe. I also do not see sufficient edits from that user to warrant a block beyond the standard thresholds of AIV, as a matter of fact, the vandalism isn't that clear either.  And, just fyi, it's confusing, but there are multiple meanings to 'stale" at AIV:
 * Dreadstar ☥  04:20, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll periodically check that user's edits, and if you see further problematic edits, please let me know directly, and I'll take care of it. Dreadstar  ☥  04:23, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Will do. I see this a bit differently because I see his/her edits as they occur.  I also interpreted "active now" as fitting into a broader time frame than a few hours.  There are multiple warnings on his/her talk page, and this may be one of four IPs (two London and two Manchester) he/she is using.  That part I can't prove (yet), but when you look at the substance of his/her edits, it's more than just some jarhead rushing to add incorrect information; it's deliberately added to disrupt the article(s) and has been since the fracas over one of Top Gear's comments about Mexico.  But we've got a plan to deal with him/her, and that's good for now.  Thanks!  Drmargi (talk) 06:00, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and semiprotected several of the Top Gear articles, looks like there's been some long-term disruption and vandalism by anon editors. That should help, but let me know if there are others.  Dreadstar  ☥  06:10, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I will, and thanks again, particularly for the semi-protects. I'm trying to back-track a group of IP's that are in the UK to see if we can find a pattern; I think we've got an IP hopper here, but can't be sure.  I do know one or two have been blocked previously.  Will let you know if anything shakes out.  Drmargi (talk) 06:12, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Will do. I see this a bit differently because I see his/her edits as they occur.  I also interpreted "active now" as fitting into a broader time frame than a few hours.  There are multiple warnings on his/her talk page, and this may be one of four IPs (two London and two Manchester) he/she is using.  That part I can't prove (yet), but when you look at the substance of his/her edits, it's more than just some jarhead rushing to add incorrect information; it's deliberately added to disrupt the article(s) and has been since the fracas over one of Top Gear's comments about Mexico.  But we've got a plan to deal with him/her, and that's good for now.  Thanks!  Drmargi (talk) 06:00, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and semiprotected several of the Top Gear articles, looks like there's been some long-term disruption and vandalism by anon editors. That should help, but let me know if there are others.  Dreadstar  ☥  06:10, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I will, and thanks again, particularly for the semi-protects. I'm trying to back-track a group of IP's that are in the UK to see if we can find a pattern; I think we've got an IP hopper here, but can't be sure.  I do know one or two have been blocked previously.  Will let you know if anything shakes out.  Drmargi (talk) 06:12, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I see you blocked this account this morning. Hopefully that will at least slow him/her down; you might want to take a peek at User:86.133.163.241; the patterns of edits is very similar, and I hear ducks quacking. That account has also had a good few warnings. I don't think there's anything actionable at the moment, but there's potential for it to go active again. Thanks! Drmargi (talk) 18:05, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Got it. Dreadstar  ☥  18:57, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * OH, you're good. That should take the wind out of his/her sails nicely!  Drmargi (talk) 19:06, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

List of Iron Chef America episodes
Apologies, I'm not currently able to look into this, I've got a major issue I'm dealing with. You might want to take it to WP:RFPP....sorry! Dreadstar ☥  00:10, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it; I appreciate your help.  I was hoping to KISS and avoid an RFP, but the guy is pretty clearly a sockpuppet (I hear ducks quacking all over the place) who's not willing to work within the system, so something will have to be done.  Drmargi (talk) 00:37, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I took a look and it was an obvious disruptive SPA sock, so I blocked the master and sprotected the target pages since there is IP Hopping going on. Dreadstar  ☥  04:49, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You are the best. I really do appreciate the trouble you went to, especially in the middle of a hassle.  This is the second go-round with the master and his puppets (Suffolk County, VA -- pull the other one) and I wasn't relishing the ugliness of a sockpuppet report.  Thank you!  Drmargi (talk) 05:03, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * For reference, in case anyone is interested in facts as opposed to emotional personal agendas. :-) From the User talk:74.108.11.202 page:


 * Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Your use of multiple IP's and a registered account to create the illusion you're more than one person (sockpuppeting) to disruptively edit is no longer acceptable. Drmargi (talk) 16:55, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * An editor has expressed concern? An editor is either 1. carelessly but not deliberately wrong on the facts (in the vernacular, clueless), or else 2. (and this would be even worse) deliberately predisposed, in bad faith, to call everyone who does anything she doesn't like an alternate IP of a single person. I imagine she reckons that in this fashion she can make it a one-on-one and then claim superiority to the "one", rather than having to face and do something about the reality that she is simply one rigid person facing multiple openminded people who happen not to agree with her at every moment about every little preference. I see she got a senior wikipedian to lock the "List of Iron Chef America episodes" article for a time. Wow, impressive. And did she give him accurate facts in order to get him to do that? ... Apparently WP:VERIFY, WP:POV, and WP:RS only come into play to justify her reversion of edits she dislikes. She might consider deploying those research principles when it comes to her own constant hypotheses of sockpuppetry. Reading around wikipedia pages over the years, I notice that bossy people often make this "you are all one person" claim, often without actually proving it with written evidence that withstands scrutiny. Reminds me of olden times on usenet. In this particular case about 74.108.11.202, it's easy for me to call BS, and we'll see how it goes from here. Occasionallyhelping (talk) 15:08, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * And, from Talk:List_of_Iron_Chef_America_episodes:


 * When I logged out a little while ago, I noticed that I had a new message sent to User talk:74.108.11.202, claiming that that IP is a sockpuppet of Chefsuffolk. But 74.108.11.202 is actually me, occasionallyhelping, which is why I got notified.


 * Since this is not paid work or professional publication, I simply do not always see the point in bothering to log in to edit. I can't put this sort of self-publication or volunteer work on a real resume, and I just do it now and then when it strikes me to add something (hence the handle). I also work from various computers; my entire employment is online. So I am sure I have edited from many IPs over time. And? -- I bet most WP editors of any volume have edited from multiple IPs.


 * Drmargi is not an unintelligent person, but she constantly insists on having her precise way, and when she encounters any dissent she says everyone who has ever done anything she doesn't like is a sockpuppet of one person. My concise comment: WP:OWN, WP:DUCK


 * By the way, I wrote both the original Hearst-youngest footnote that drmargi keeps putting back up now, and also the FN-got-it-wrong-about-Hearst footnote that she keeps deleting. [One was written based on original information, the other based on subsequent information.] I'm kind of enjoying the pingpong being so fiercely played with my little notes. :-) I'm happy for it to be either way. BUT in the hierarchy of actual real-research values (I edit academic publications), getting it right always trumps such lower-ranking research values as where information is gotten from and accurately credited to. What WP article is that, WP:GETITRIGHT? :-) Occasionallyhelping (talk) 07:06, 11 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Occasionallyhelping (talk • contribs)

Thanks!
Thanks so much for the barnstar! Really appreciated, especially now! And I'm glad I could help... Dreadstar ☥  15:36, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You deserve it. I read a bit of the case, and I'm rooting for you!  Drmargi (talk) 15:40, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Two comments
Hello... sorry to have to ask this, given all your work here, but you need to stop reverting the word "season" in place of "series" for the list of Doctor Who episodes. Despite the airing on BBCA, the article is written in British English and as such uses the appropriate spellings. (We do not mix spellings, as demonstrated in Cheque.) Incidentally, I dialled up your contributions to see if you had posted about the "series"/"season" matter and noticed that you were also reverting in "Quebecois" at the "Iron Chef" list. Again, please note that we would in fact use "Canada" in that case; the notes refer to the country and the subject's own article uses "Canadian". Thanks in advance. --Ckatz <sup style="color:green;">chat <sub style="color:red;">spy  15:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I still disagree. I made the original edit that added the information about the BBC America promotions for season six, which is how it's being promoted in the US.  It's not just a matter of preference for American English, it's inaccurate to use the term series to describe what BBC America is showing/promoting.  The MOS and ENGVAR allow for variations such as this in order to maintain accuracy, given BBC America is not promoting the UK Series 6, but rather is promoting US Season 6.  Drmargi (talk) 18:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * If I may interject, I am British and have followed Doctor Who an awful lot longer than America has known about it. Drmargi is correct; though the article is in English (not American), as is the show, the original 1963-1996 running gave 'Season'. When the show began again in 2005, they (the BBC) used 'Series' as they began again from 1 (hence why we are at Series 7 as opposed to Season 43 or there abouts) but in the US the original run isn't aired like the new series and so they use the traditional 'Season'. As much as I hate to say it, perhaps you could take the American use. The term is mixed, people using both 'Series' and 'Season' for referance in the same sentence. Of course, what America airs is different to what the UK (and separately, Scotland) air. My belief is that they should both get separate lists. BBC America is on Season 6, BBC on Series 7. To clarify, both could be included and though I would personally side with the British on the use of 'Series' (it's a British show) my better judgement suggests that more people will understand it as 'Season'. But what do I know, this isn't even my discussion. Sorry. --Tropzax (talk) 20:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Organization of POI recurring characters
That actually does sound like good idea. Whatever you want to do is cool with me. <b style="color:#0000FF;">QuasyBoy</b> (talk)  01:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Not bad. :) My only suggestion is maybe having a "Main characters" subsection for Reese, Finch, Carter and Fusco. <b style="color:#0000FF;">QuasyBoy</b> (talk)  13:41, 09 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Perfect :) <b style="color:#0000FF;">QuasyBoy</b> (talk)  14:36, 09 July 2012 (UTC)

Request for comment Copyedit
Hiya,

Ok i have made the draft of the request for comment up, can you look over it and fix the grammar and spelling. Also the questions section can you look at it and see if some of the questions might be duplicating themselves and if they are help me find a way to merge them into one question but still get the same result for a consensus. I do have a few more sources to add with quotes but that is just copy and pasting quoted text from a source and link to the source. also the section comments no discussion that is section for other users comment so it probably best not editing that part. Request for Comment Draft-- Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 15:18, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Will do! I'm just heading out for work now, so it will be a while, but I'll get to it this evening.  --Drmargi (talk) 15:25, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * no problem, thanks for doing it, hopefulyl this can work for all future things. :), you dnt need to worry about time as i can not put it out until after friday as that when key decision regarding this dispute will be made so i can get more sources then Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 17:43, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * you might want to think about setting up auto archiving so your talk page is not so clutter and makes it esier for users to find there post and reply-- Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 17:44, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, Andrew! It's edited. What I know about Scottish football is pretty limited, so I read up a bit; I think I've got it clearer and easier to read now. It needed a lot of very minor editing more than anything. I also added two new headings to separate the club history from the history of the article itself. You did a great job! --Drmargi (talk) 16:03, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * thanks for making it better hopefully this request for comment will sort the problem although knowing scottish football as much i do i doubt it will and we will be heading to the next level of the dispute resolution, part of what i done on this is preparing for that to happen Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 16:27, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Speaking of the archive... my editing fee  (kidding...) is you showing me how to do the archive.  Would you mind?  I can't figure it out, and I've been thinking a lot about getting this mess archived recently.  --Drmargi (talk) 16:04, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * yeah i will post the code later for you just back in and about to have dinner Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 16:27, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk page archiving
put this at the top of your talk page, edit these to suit |minthreadsleft = 0 <-- this one determine minimum number of posts you want to keep on your talk page |minthreadstoarchive = 1 <-- this one determines teh minimum number of talk page threads to archive |algo = old(7d)<-- this determine how old the talk must be before it is archived, |age=7 this one update to the same as algo as it display how old the threads ned to be before archived so other eidtors know when there talk might go form yrou page Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 16:44, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * You're wonderful! Thank you, Andrew!  Isn't teamwork great?  --Drmargi (talk) 17:03, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd suggest


 * Once the page has archived most of the content you can tweak  based on the amount of content that is being added to your page. 50k is a bit small for an archive. You can go to 200k or higher comfortably but based on your user page 100k is a balance between size and the number of threads. I think Automatic archive navigator is a better archive header than Talkarchivenav  but if you want to use Talkarchivenav, use the "y" switch. For convenience, you might also like to index your talk page using Archive Indexerbot. You'll need to create User talk:Drmargi/Archive index and add the following to your talk page:


 * The result is something like this. --AussieLegend (talk) 20:11, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

What would I do without friends who speak this language? I'm not helpless as a rule, but there's a reason I stay in the safety of the social sciences. Thanks, Aussie! --Drmargi (talk) 20:14, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, installed. So far nothing has happened, but I'm guessing the bot runs at specific times rather than immediately.  Yes?  --Drmargi (talk) 22:18, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, wait a day. --AussieLegend (talk) 22:50, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * all done now, so teh bot will archive when the define limit are reach and oyu should hvae easier talk page to navigate Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 14:47, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I"m really grateful to you and Aussie for the help. I'd been reading the Bot directions for a couple days, trying to figure it out, but they're really not very clear if you haven't got some training with this language.  Next question:  How do I add a little box with the archives?  --Drmargi (talk) 14:55, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

that should do it you coudl also add and the achivies can be added to that i cant remember of the top of my head how Andrewcrawford  ( talk  -  contrib ) 15:06, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Adding yes will allow you to search the archives from the archive box.

--AussieLegend (talk) 15:30, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Happy Days! Done!  Why is it when you two lay it out, it's perfectly clear, but the docs aren't? (Rhetorical question.) --Drmargi (talk) 15:35, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sometimes even the best of us can be completely confused. Today a bot made this edit to List of The Suite Life on Deck episodes, but I couldn't understand why, because the reference still existed in the article. However, when I looked more closely, episodes 5-17 had disappeared completely from season 3 and yet, nothing had been deleted from the article. It had me stumped until I realised this edit caused it, simply by using an extra exclamation mark when adding a hidden comment. Talk about confusing! By the way, your talk page looks a lot smaller! --AussieLegend (talk) 14:50, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyedit again
hiya,

can you copyedit the entire user:andrewcrawford/mydraft i have to make changes because some thing where nto clear, can you check everything including the questions etc to make sure it all makes sense i am planning to put it lvie today or tomorrow Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 13:45, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Smelly socks?
I don't know whether you watch Warehouse 13, but today an article about a recurring character appeared out of nowhere. The author restored the article after I redirected it. Before that though, he/she started a discussion on the talk page. Within 24 minutes an IP responded, and then, an account that appears to have been created just to post glowing comments on the talk page responded 53 minutes later. It seems to be a hell of a lot of attention for a new article. I can't help thinking some socking is involved. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:14, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Funny, I heard ducks quacking before I finished reading this. That must be a flock of the sock variety. I don't watch the show but am familiar with the character as I have a friend who's an avid viewer. I might make a little phone call. --Drmargi (talk) 12:49, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I just read through everything, and tagged a couple issues on the main article. I also had a look at the article on wikia; the lists such as are in the article abound over there and I wondered if there might have been some plagiarism.  Take a peek: the wikia article is vastly better.  --Drmargi (talk) 14:32, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

On Helena Wells
Hi Drmargi, can you help me understand what it is about the secondary independent references I included this morning that somehow do not denote proper notability? I did make an entry on the talk page before removing the tag, by the way, I'm just not sure if you read it. If you can respond there that would be great. I have no problem making the suggested improvements, but this is my first article so I am not sure about everything just yet. Thanks. Electprogeny (talk) 18:28, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * What you have now is a wall of text. Someone made major edits to the text yesterday to reduce the in-universe content, and your little friend Mynameisme (or whatever it is) immediately, and wrongly, reverted it.  You don't have to include every little thing you know about the character; be selective!  As it is now, the article is utterly unreadable.  Worse, it's got so much in-universe content, it's in deletion territory again.  And you still haven't made a case for why the character is notable enough to merit an article, just loaded it up with minutia.  I could boil down most of what's in that article that's really important into one or two paragraphs and restore it to the characters article, and we'd know as much as we need to know now.  WHY is this character so important?  I just don't see it.  All your secondary references do make the content you've added verifiable.  Have you read WP:NOTABILITY?  If not, do.  --Drmargi (talk) 14:24, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, I will continue to work on the in-universe style which requires further re-writing as opposed to deletion of text. I left a comment in a section on that issue on the talk page for the article - can you pick something from the article and let me know what is "in-universe" about that particular selection so I can research a better way to phrase it?  That would be a tremendous help.  As for the notability, it was categorically stated by a helper/admin-type that the article has established notability - comments were left by that person to specify this in both talk pages pertinent to that discussion.  The wall of text - not sure what that's supposed to mean in terms of a suggestion.


 * To answer your question about "WHY is this character so important" - there are a lot of reasons, but primarily it's because I think the influence of H.G. on the show has been monumental. She's not, by any means, a trivial character.  She completely changes the way Myka responds to the world around her in severely meaningful ways.  Joanne, Jack, Jaime, and Saul have all talked about that.  Additionally, her role in shaping the way things played out at the end of the last season is huge, and Syfy IS in the middle of creating an entire series around her (which has been well-documented all over the place and is even brought up on the DVD commentaries).  It may be that some feel this character does not deserve to be given an independent article because she's not a principle on Warehouse 13, but she is not "just" a recurring character and is not, by any means, a minor one.  Thanks for the suggestions, I appreciate them.  Electprogeny (talk) 16:24, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * "As for the notability, it was categorically stated by a helper/admin-type that the article has established notability" - That's simply an opinion of one editor (who isn't an admin by the way, not that being an admin makes any difference) Having reviewed the sources that were added, I agree with Drmargi, notability doesn't appear to be established. WP:N requires significant coverage, i.e. more than a mention in a recap for example. As for in-universe perspective, this is addressed in Manual of Style/Writing about fiction. --AussieLegend (talk) 16:50, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I was told that I needed at least 4 secondary sources that fit the bill, and multiple folks in the helper area agreed this had been met. Was told to contact them again if this came up for issue, but I will continue to add references in any case.  Thanks for the link, I've viewed it multiple times and feel as if the article is in keeping with that guideline.  No one seems to have any actual example of just WHAT they think is still in-universe, nor any suggestion on what a re-written example from the article would look like.  Until someone can assist me with that, I am unable to determine if the concern is valid. Electprogeny (talk) 22:15, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * In the "helper area" (which I assume is the Teahouse) those editors, like the single editor, don't make unilateral decisions. You badly, badly need to read WP:CONSENSUS.  Any editor can challenge whether you've established notability at any time and the consensus process kicks in.  --Drmargi (talk) 00:19, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I can't see anywhere in the Teahouse where any specific number of sources has been mentioned. Electprogeny was told, quite appropriately, "the salient issue as I see it and as the other user has also referred to, is whether there exist sufficient, independent, reliable  secondary  sources which cover the topic in some depth." If Electprogeny has been given a spefic number, then he's getting bad advice as this is specified nowhere. --AussieLegend (talk) 03:51, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Food Network Star
As far as this, two things:
 * 1) The series was never called The Food Network Star.
 * 2) Why isn't a new reference sufficient? It would be different if that reference were present before and the consensus was not to move.  Erpert  Who is this guy? 03:53, 30 July 2012 (UTC)


 * That the name changed was never in question. Whether the articles moved should be moved was.  Consensus was not to move, therefore you moved over consensus when you should have gone to the main article page and opened a new discussion.  You didn't do that, and left yourself open to be reverted.  The rest was my mistake, which I asked an admin to fix, nothing more.  --Drmargi (talk) 08:35, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You have that a little incorrect. As I clearly stated above, the ref that I added wasn't there when the consensus was not to move. There was no consensus (not yet, anyway) not to move after the ref was added.  Erpert  Who is this guy? 17:48, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Great stuff
Thanks for the note. I hadn't noticed that at all. Now I'm gonna have to go back and check the credits out. I remember the interview with Phelong way back in the Morse days where he said that he had put the killers name in the Morse code in the music in some early stories but then switched it in later stories just to mess with people. Good to know that they have kept clever things like that going. Dexter as a crossword setter probably enjoys that a bunch. I just finished the third season of Wallander and it has some good stuff in it. The third story gets quite emotional towards the end. Thanks again and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 17:18, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Please feel free to send me an email. I would send you one but I don't see the "send this user an email" command enabled in your toolbox. I most certainly understand why you or any editor would not want that function turned on so please don't think I am criticizing the situation. I have had a couple viewing recommendations that I wanted to pass along to you but did not want to clutter up your talk page with the details. Hope you have a wonderful week. MarnetteD | Talk 23:02, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Sad News
Hi D. Just was this sad news about Bob Hoskins. Doubly so since part of my recent email was about him. Hope you are well. MarnetteD | Talk 15:55, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm heartbroken! He's always been a favorite, and long overdue for a knighthood.  Sorry for not checking e-mail; it's been a mad couple days.  --Drmargi (talk) 17:21, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * No problem at all on email checking. It'll be there when you have the time. I've been reminiscing about some of my fave performances. His Iago opposite Anthony Hopkin's Othello is a treat and the TV version of Pennies from Heaven is an all timer. One early series that is available on DVD is Thick as Thieves. It was made back in 74. It also stars John Thaw. As Britcom's go it is probably middle of the pack but the chance to see both men so young and Thaw in particular playing against type might make it worth your while if Netflix or a company like that has it. For a few years I had a correspondence with User:John Thaxter a theatre critic living outside London. Sadly he passed away last January. He shared many wonderful stories about performances that he had seen and here is one about Hoskins for your enjoyment


 * Helen Mirren and Hoskins were performing in The Duchess of Malfi (here is a pic ). One of the young actors playing one of the children killed in the last act did not break character and remained prone on the stage after the plays end so, while the audience was clapping, Hoskins came over, picked him up and said "take a bow me son we get to go home now"


 * Best wishes MarnetteD | Talk 17:50, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * He is so fabulous, with so many wonderful performances. A friend and I play "who's being knighted" every time the honours list announcements come close, and he's been top of my list for years.  It's past time.  --Drmargi (talk) 12:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Longmire
"Odd formatting"? It's full and proper wiki formatting. Line feeds in the cite are fine. Red-links are perfectly fine if there is a reasonable expectation that an article can be created for the subject in the future.

Change unclear? I stated "series misnamed" in my comments - try reading those and try respecting them. I also provided a cite - try providing a cite that names the series "Longmire" - may be hard to find. The TV program lists it as "Walt Longmire mysteries". I own the books they are named "Walt Longmire mysteries".

DO NOT undo "good faith edits" - this completely unacceptable.

--Hutcher (talk) 18:36, 11 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Nonsense. My prerogative as an editor is to undo any edit I feel is inappropriate, and I stand by my decision.  A source is fine when it's used correctly.  In your edit, the word mysteries is inside quotes, but uncapitalized. In American English, text in title case (in quotes) is fully capitalized other than a handful of small words.  In this case, the use of mystery describes the novels rather than being part of the title, as does your source, and thereby belongs outside quotes.  I did retain his first name, which is used in your source as well as by Amazon.com.  Individual books are labeled (not subtitled) "A Walt Longmire Mystery", but I see no use of "Walt Longmire Mysteries" or "The Walt Longmire Mysteries" in any source cited in the article or Amazon.com. --Drmargi (talk) 20:28, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi again
I saw your post on Redrose's page and I just wanted to say that I don't think you made a mistep. Based on a couple earlier events and discussions my impression is that R just wanted to ignore this/these editor(s). Pretty much of a do not feed the troll attitude for which R is to be admired. I don't want to speak for Redrose ot to clutter up their page with my guesses since they may be wide of the mark. The legal threat was definitely ANI worthy and, since the article in question was also protected, may have brought relief from this situation for several days. I can hear so many different characters (especially from EastEnders) saying "pull the other one; it has bells on it." I suspect you new I would be smiling when I read it. Oy I still haven't hit the pillows. I am gonna pay for this later today. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 08:38, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks again guys. I've just finished reading the various posts on ANI and at least five user talk pages (I may have missed some!) and there's only one small thing - I don't see the IP as "defending my ownership" at all, but posting sarcastic comments about my attitude: the IP believes that I violate WP:OWN and thinks that by taking my name in vain, it somehow gives credence to their edits. My attitude, for the record, is that all future release dates should be reliably and appropriately sourced ("appropriately" because I've sometimes seen a Region 4 release date being sourced to an Amazon page for the corresponding Region 1 DVD). Anyway, I'm not here to rant at you. -- Red rose64 (talk) 14:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That's good to know, both of you and thanks for the reassurance. Talk pages are like e-mail and text messages; no pragmatic clues to help us interpret events! I was SO annoyed at the insults to MarnetteD, I might have gone off, say, 1/4 cocked, and was worried I'd caused more trouble than I'd solved.  Redrose, I see what you mean about the sarcasm.  That was my first impression reading just the edit summaries, but we do get adolescent true believers here in abundance, and Doctor Who seemed fertile ground for one.  Coupled with the petulant nature of the posts on MD's talk page and mine, I took him seriously rather than seeing him as sarcastic in the end, for good or for ill.  At least we've got the main IP out of business for a week, and the others slowed down until the semi expires.  And then we'll see.  --Drmargi (talk) 06:51, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Hotel Hell
I've just requested page protection, so it's probably better to hold off doing any more reverts until that is done (if it's done). In the meantime, I have a 3RR report to compile. (*sigh*) --AussieLegend (talk) 17:26, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I was fixin' to do one of those myself, but I'll let you. Meanwhile, I started the needed discussion so that's covered.  --Drmargi (talk) 17:29, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Belated funny
Hi D. I wish I had known/remembered that you watched the Doctor last month. I left this message User talk:DonQuixote for several people. You might have seen it on another talk page but in case you didn't I think it'll bring a chuckle to your day. On another note I've had some delightful, wonderful crushes in my life. I am glad that this wonderful performer in the guise of River Song has joined that group. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 02:18, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * They should have built David Tennant into the opening ceremonies, somehow! I cannot imagine anyone else playing River Song with the brio of Alex Kingston. RTD wanted Kate Winslet, but Alex Kingston is fabulous.  Can't argue with your other crushes; they've all been particular favorites of mine forever!  Thanks so much for the funny! --Drmargi (talk) 20:52, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Why revert?
Why did you, without an edit summary, my edit at The Newsroom (U.S. TV series)? I added a link for Duke University, corrected an adverbial use ("speaks fluently Japanese"), corrected a citation template and the spelling of The Washington Examiner and "Agence France-Presse". Which of these needed to be reverted? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:52, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It's not correct. It's either speaks Japanese fluently (adverbial form) or speaks fluent Japanese (adjectival form).  But NOT speaks fluently Japanese.  I overlooked the lower edits; my apology for that.  --Drmargi (talk) 07:57, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Top Gear ratings
I've tried to put the ratings for each series which I had in separate tables into the existing tables, but it doesn't seem to work. I've visited the Teahouse, yet I don't seem to have figured it out. A little help. Emirates123 (talk) 18:32, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Just a heads-up
Hi, you recently remarked to me in one of your summaries that my previous summary lacked civility, I also noticed that you are a rather new editor to Wikipedia. First off, welcome, second, if there is one thing you are sure to learn quickly on this site it's that a substantial amount of editors are incredibly rude, overbearing, and vulgar. Here on Wikipedia you need to grow a very thick layer of skin to deflect the foul that is bound to hit your metaphorical windshield. Editors tend to be off kilter most of the time due to so many irrelevant and hapless edits to their individual watch pages, you just haft to learn to accept a grain of salt at times. I, in no way, mean to unhinge you, but simply prepare you for the hail storm to come. Cheers, LiamNolan24 (talk) 23:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Liam all I can say is Oy Vey. First off how is someone who has been editing since 2006 (and it should be noted that you have only edited here for five months) a new editor? Next, yes a number of editors are rude but WP:CIVILITY is still one of the Five pillars. Drmargi can speak for herself, of course, but I can tell you that she has seen virtually all that there is to see here and NONE of it has unhinged her. BTW a "haft" is the handle of a sword. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 00:10, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * It was presumptuous of me to assume your time on Wikipedia, for that I apologize. My point remains reverent though. MarnetteD It is quite presumptuous of you to assume my time on Wikipedia. I have been editing this site for 7 years, just changed my user name about 40 times, due to enraged editors. I started this dialogue because my off-the-cuff remark upset Drmargi, I suppose that lead to my assumption that she was a newbie. I just had a very heated conversation with an Admin about the ethics and morals of Wikipedia, in the end he came to the conclusion that every form of editor's choice of grammar is acceptable, as long as it does not violate WP:PERSONAL. I was at first disappointed in his assessment, but have come to know it as truth. Case in point, MarnetteD you fall under my aforementioned overbearing editor category by interjecting your opinion here. BTW, auto-correct sucks, I like the word "haft" though. Cheers, LiamNolan24 (talk) 02:25, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Wow, 40 usernames over 7 years (aside form the WP:SOCK implications) and you don't know how to check how long another editor has been here. That seems odd. Considering the hyperbole you have thrown at several other editors the term overbearing may have WP:BOOMERANG connotations. It is always interesting to wonder why someone takes part in such a deplorable endeavor. MarnetteD | Talk 02:44, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

My, my, my, my, my. I go meet a friend for coffee and look what I come back to. Liam, in a word, baloney. Off-the-cuff? Hardly. Calling me reprehensible for reverting one of your edits which did not pass WP:VERIFY is in no way civil and is way out of proportion. Moreover, the poor behavior of others here in no way is a free pass for you to call names because you didn't get your way. And really, upset, much less unhinge me? Good lord, it's an edit on a web page and I'm not an adolescent. It seems to me that if anyone needs to invest in a thicker skin, it's you. I'm not the one calling names in a fit of pique because I didn't get my way. BTW, you might want to take the time to read WP:BRD and avoid edit wars such as the one you were on the verge of starting this afternoon.

As Marnette suggested, it would behoove you to be far more careful about how you approach editors you don't know. It's a minute's effort to check on an editor's history via their contributions page, and spares many a neophyte such as yourself a hearty application of egg to face. Given you have as few edits as you do, I'd suggest a bit less leaping to assumptions and giving of advice are in order and a whole lot more listening and learning would be advisable instead. What's more, any editor is allowed to comment on the contents of any talk page, and the only one who will decide who is or isn't welcome here is me. I think an apology is in order; Marnette gave you some very good advise based on your having presented yourself first as a new editor, and now as a sock puppeteer. Very worrying indeed. --Drmargi (talk) 04:36, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Wow, I don't even know what to say. I am speechless... it is truly scary how crazy people are on here. I am literally terrified for my privacy. Don't give me any of your oh-so-scrupulous Wikipedia rhetoric, this investigation is humanly chilling. How dare either of you claim to know my history or circumstances on Wikipedia. I employ you both to go back to your salt mines and leave me alone. (p.s. I already know what you're going to say You were the one that contacted me first., BIGGEST MISTAKE ALL YEAR!) LiamNolan24 (talk) 06:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * By speechless you mean "I am going to keep digging a hole (salt mine or other)". Anyones edit history is verifiable by one or two clicks of their mouse. Your own post mentions 7 years of editing and up to 40 usernames so claiming victimhood will be a difficult stance to maintain. One still has to wonder why you devote your energies to something that you have no respect for and even consider Ubsurd (sic) MarnetteD | Talk 06:59, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * For heaven's sake, LiamNolan, you're the one who stirred the pot by blatantly admitting to all those identities. You can't be surprised that other editors might view such an admission with suspicion.  But terrified for your privacy?  Investigation?  WHAT investigation?  Frankly, you're being a bit ridiculous.  Neither of us claimed to know anything but what you yourself said.  But you let the genie out of the bottle, and you can't expect someone else to put it back for you.  Next time, think before you run your electronic mouth and you don't have a problem.  As for now?  On your own head be it, whatever the consequences.  --Drmargi (talk) 12:59, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Five-0
Ok, you're right! But what about the info about the pre-premiere on September 23, 2012 in Hawaii on the Waikiki beach. This info is known everywhere. -- LAW CSI (talk) 20:21, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't know it, and the source you used is a fan site. If it's "known everywhere" as you say, there will be a reliable media source that it's being held.  BTW, it's Waikiki Beach, not the Waikiki Beach.  --Drmargi (talk) 20:59, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Here my sorces: 1, examiner.com, 3, 4, 5 -- LAW CSI (talk) 09:36, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

FYI
Hi D. Paul Thomas Anderson's has a new film going into general release tomorrow. I watched the trailer and there are no scenes on Gallifrey nor are any of the Dr's incarnations present. :-) Actually, his films are usually interesting so I am looking forward to this one. Cheers and have a nice weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 14:44, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * You;ve probably already seen these but in case you haven't I think you'll get a kick out of this pic . All of our US shows get going this week so I know you will be busier. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 22:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Re: POI
I wouldn't object to it. But we will see as the season progresses if its really necessary. And the season premiere was great. <b style="color:#0000FF;">QuasyBoy</b> (talk)  14:17, 28 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Well that was an enjoyable beginning to the new season. Just one thought regarding your question about the machine on Q's talk page D. You might want to proceed carefully and make sure that everything you add is well sourced. My example of how things can get out of hand is River Song (Doctor Who). There was so much WP:OR written just after she was introduced and, as things turned out, Moffat was going in a direction that had little to due with all the speculation.


 * On another note I had a naughty/fun thought pop to mind while Reese was talking to (negotiating with) the machine. My vision was that when he reaches whatever building/room that the machine is house in he will find this person sitting there with his cat. MarnetteD | Talk 14:40, 28 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I can't help but think that, at times, these articles are too narrowly organized under billing categories (main v. recurring). I just tried to break up the cast for another show in natural groupings and the teeny-boys couldn't handle it -- "we must stick to the format slavishly because these are the rules!" was all the rationale for reverting I could get from them.  Never mind the cast is now a jumble under two usual but useless headings.  I did do the clustering of recurring characters without a fuss on POI and it really helps the reader understand the relationships among the various groups.  Part of the problem, of course, is we have far too many younger editors, mostly male if what I read is to be believed, who have never used an encyclopedia, and don't think in terms of organizing information encyclopedically.  For them, this is a fan site with more rules.  M, I didn't see the River Song discussion at the time, but having seen others DW related, I can just imagine.


 * My point being, points well taken. I'm thinking how to do this, because it needs to be there if we're going to fully understand the show.  But how to approach it is the question.  I do plan to start short and can add to the segment as we go. Meanwhile, how about those ratings! --Drmargi (talk) 17:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you for the barnstar! Though I feel guilty I haven't been working on the topic like I ant to. But, I think I'll be taking a break for editing the topic a while, because of the latest developments. I think I'll need a few days, then I'll throw myself into doing what I can. ~Cheers, Ten  Ton  Parasol  00:11, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

2012–13 United States network television schedule
Please feel free to join in the discussion on the talk page of the article regarding the Unforgettable renewal situation, and maybe we can get a resolution amongst everyone. Many thanks! (Richardm9 (talk) 23:52, 19 October 2012 (UTC))

2012/13 United States network television schedule
Hello! I see you reverted my edit. As I could see why, there was a talk page discussion about it. Please leave my revert of Unforgettable alone. Thank you! 24.164.159.145 (talk) 19:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

A bit of Dr Who fun for you
Hello DM. I hope that you are well and that the school year is going smoothly. I just received an email from a DW friend regarding the fact that the Japanese kanji for doctor looks a bit like a man in a box. In fact that might be a fez on the left side of the head. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 16:22, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

please help please
i want to add some information about sex scene of actress paoli dam which some orthodox guys are preventing me,i have proper and valid links for the edit which i want to make but they are still preventing me so i am posting that information below which has valid and proper links and i request you to post it on actress paoli dam page please.

In 2011 Actress Paoli Dam Starred In Bengali Film Of Sri Lankan Director Vimukti Jayasundara,Chatrak(2011) Was Screened In Cannes Film Festival And Was A Subject Of Controversy Because Of A 3 Minute Nude Sex Scene Featuring Paoli Dam And Bengali Actor Anubrata Basu Of Gandu Fame,The Sex Scene Was Highly Erotic In Nature Featuring Completely Nude Paoli Dam Receiving Oral Sex From Anubrata,Later Paoli Dam Said That Scene Was Required By The Script And Many Hollywood Actresses Too Have Given Nude Sex Scene And she Is No Exception In This Field ,Later In An Interview Paoli Dam Said "Yes, I was completely nude. So was my co-star and in the scene the girl is getting all the pleasure! The scene involves love, sex and pleasure" she further said "We don’t wear clothes and make love, do we? Then why should we do that in cinema?"

Paoli Dam's Sex Scene

please post this information ON actress paoli dam page please it has valid and proper links.

please i am sachin and i really need your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.204.39 (talk) 09:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I can't help with this. Please discuss on the article's talk page.  If the content is appropriate, you will be able to reach consensus.  --Drmargi (talk) 12:53, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I see that you've updated the 2012-13 United States network television schedule by changing "PM" into "Network". Can you do the same for the other network television schedule pages right now?
I see that you've updated the 2012–13 United States network television schedule by changing "PM" into "Network". Can you please also update all the other United States network television schedule pages immediately? Please let me know right away. This is very important!! Thank you very much. AdamDeanHall (talk) 15:39, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Check your email
Hi DM. I hope that you are well and that the school year is moving along smoothly. You have a new ecard in your email. I hope that you enjoy it. Also this company does an advent calendar that makes each cay of December a little (even a lot sometimes) more fun. Please let me know if you would like one and I will send it along. Have a delish turkey day. Gobble gobble pass the gravy and stuffing please. Burp. MarnetteD | Talk 03:09, 20 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Are you digesting nicely? I finally finished the dishes and got all the food put away.  I swear my fridge shrinks just in time for Thanksgiving.  Hope yours was fabulous!  Will e-mail tomorrow.  --Drmargi (talk) 08:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

SpacePirates on List of POI episode
Hi Drmargi,

I just wanted your opinion on this user, what they have been doing, and what to do going forward. I agree with what you posted in your response after mine [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_Person_of_Interest_episodes#Q2. here] (and sorry about that edit mistake on my part). In my opinion, based on the small amount of time I've been editing on here, this is completely out of line and against Wikipedia policies.

Just wanted your thoughts. Thanks. -Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:58, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, he's quite clearly lost any perspective on the issue. Let's see what happens over the next few hours, then see if a move to a noticeboard is in order.  In the meantime, any future transgressions need a warning on his talk page.  --Drmargi (talk) 22:39, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


 * He just did it again, and I had to tag him for 3RR.  Next stop:  AN:3.  --Drmargi (talk) 22:54, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * If you bring it to AN:3, may you please link the post here or on my personal talk page? Thanks again. -Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:53, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll let you know. --Drmargi (talk) 03:58, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Please Help
I Really Need Your Help On Actor Jack O'Connell's Page He Is Half Irish And He Himself Said That,I Also Gave That Link On The Talk Page Of Jack But No One Is Listening To Me And They Even Locked The Article Despite My Valid Links About His Being Irish.Please Change Jack's Nationality To Irish-British. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.251.159 (talk) 09:44, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

2012 in film
Hey, Drmargi. We might need your help on the conflict of issues on 2012 in film.

On that tall page section Worldwide view, discusses the issue regarding the list of number 1 films in countries in that year. They removed the links to the 2012 number one films in the english-speaking countries. Some of us don't agree with it. I don't agree with it because the link Lists of box office number-one films is not as quick as going to List of 2012 box office number-one films in the United States and List of 2012 box office number-one films in the United Kingdom and it's going to frustrate many english readers on the 2012 in film. I rather that the readers go to the links of the number 1 films from US and UK from the 2012 in film quicker without having to go to list of box office number one films without selecting which country from there. So you might want to help solve this issue soon. BattleshipMan (talk) 02:48, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

I also informed Doniago on this, just so you know. BattleshipMan (talk) 03:06, 24 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm having trouble finding what you're referring to. Maybe once the holiday chaos subsides, I'll be a bit sharper and will try again.  --Drmargi (talk) 08:32, 26 November 2012 (UTC)


 * There is clash of issues over the viewing of number one box office films in 2012 in film. Some people remove the links List of 2012 box office number-one films in the United States and List of 2012 box office number-one films in the United Kingdom and replace it with the Lists of box office number-one films, saying that they think it's bias to have only english speaking links to it. I say we should have set up see also or main article on the links of number one box-office films at US and UK on there as well. People will be frustrated by not going to the links on List of 2012 box office number-one films in the United States and List of 2012 box office number-one films in the United Kingdom from 2012 in film and by having to go all the way down to the bottom of the Lists of box office number-one films to reach those links, which I can tell some of the readers wouldn't like. BattleshipMan (talk) 17:15, 26 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I hope you are helping with this issue I told about in 2012 in film. BattleshipMan (talk) 16:21, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

2011-12 vs 2011/12 on POI page
I have made this change in accordance with WP:SLASH and WP:YEAR, and because other TV series episode pages are stylized like this (List of The Big Bang Theory episodes, List of How I Met Your Mother episodes, List of Two and a Half Men episodes to name a few). Where does this break links and where have other changes like this been reverted? I have not found another current TV series page that is not stylized that this. Even so, there are more with the slash than the dash, that I say that is consensus. Also, season two can still be renamed 2012-13 or 2012/13, regardless, as air dates have been confirmed. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:13, 7 December 2012 (UTC)


 * One thing that's fascinating about Wikipedia is editing trends and what I call the Lemming Effect. A month or so ago, someone came through the list articles for the US TV season and changed them all from year-year format, which is correct American English, to year/year format, citing WP:SLASH.  Trouble is, SLASH was misinterpreted (a slash is only used in very specific applications and usually for periods of time shorter than a year, which WP:YEAR noted), and in American English, years are separated by a dash, not a slash, as noted several places in the MOS. However... someone saw them and the edit began to move into the TV articles, which is what you've seen.  That's the Lemming Effect; someone does it, citing (however incorrectly) some policy or another, and the trend spreads.  Last year it was separating within season from across season numbering with No. and #, two terms which mean the same thing and do absolutely nothing to differentiate two columns of numbers with very different meanings.  Worse are the buzz phrases everyone persists in using, such as every new bit of information on a show being a revelation.


 * The bottom line is it's incorrect formatting (a slash is used to separate parallel terms, not sequential ones, where a dash is used, most particularly with numbers), and most of the edits like this have been reverted. That there are a few still around doesn't mean the use is correct.  Be brave!  Go against the trend!  This is an encyclopedia where our first emphasis should be good writing in proper American English.  --Drmargi (talk) 00:19, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "Proper American English"?? Really? International English is spoken by far more people than Amerrrykans who persistently mispronounce even simple words. (Sorry yanks but there's no such thing as an "eemoo", and it's pronounced "Ozzie", not "Ossie". That said, until recently WP:YEAR specified that a slash was used (sorry - "oosed") for periods of 12 months or less, which is correct in the English speaking world. This is the English language Wikipedia, not the US Wikipedia. :P --<font style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#fee72c 0em 0em 0.8em,gold -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#1D6B00 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#000000">AussieLegend ( ✉ ) 09:54, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * And you imagine I don't know that, particularly given the level of editing I do in British English? For heaven's sake, Aussie, use your head; you're too smart not be able to contextualize my comments better than you have here.  We're talking about an American TV show article where American English is used, and I'm discussing with a comparatively new editor, so my priority is comprehension.  Now is not the time for expansive discussion of the use of American v. British English on the Wikipedia.  Use of a slash was never correct in American English, except in some narrow financial applications (as noted in the MOS). and the preponderance of American TV articles use the en-dash, also as noted in the MOS.  (And we'll avoid getting into how you lot pronounce a variety of things, beginning with Los Angeles; you can make your arguments without stooping cheap stereotypes.)  --Drmargi (talk) 14:47, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Twas a joke, hence the emote. And we pronounce "Los Angeles" as Americans do, or like . --<font style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#fee72c 0em 0em 0.8em,gold -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#1D6B00 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#000000">AussieLegend ( ✉ ) 09:28, 11 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh, lordy. I wondered if you might have been after the fact. Sorry to be such a drip.  --Drmargi (talk) 11:13, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Question about List of Burn Notice Episodes (12/22/12)
Regarding: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Burn_Notice_episodes you undid the most recent edit to indicate when the next season will air but did not give a reason... why (to both)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gellender (talk • contribs) 16:03, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * It was unsourced. --Drmargi (talk) 19:17, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't know how to source something; I put the source in the description of the edit; can you add the information back in with the correct source syntax? If you don't believe me just look at the burn notice website. --Gellender (talk) 21:56, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I see it was in the edit summary now (I was editing on my iPad which causes me to miss things on occasion.) Let's teach you how to add the source, then.  The syntax is .  Easy-peasy!  Why don't you go back, add the sentence again, and try adding the source afterward, then let me know when you have, and I'll double-check it?  --Drmargi (talk) 22:53, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I added it using a ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Burn_Notice_episodes#Season_7 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gellender (talk • contribs) 18:12, 23 December 2012 (UTC)


 * There you go! Done perfectly!  I made a minor tweak and changed "next summer" to the more specific summer 2013, but you did the big job.  (One other gentle nudge; don't forget to sign your posts!)  Give me a shout if I can help in the future. --Drmargi (talk) 18:57, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares
Does the latest editor here look familiar to you? Dougweller (talk) 15:46, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think so, but I'm not absolutely certain; there are two possibilities. I want to do a little reading before I identify anyone, unless we've got grounds to run a checkuser.  I'm assuming you've seen all four pages with that edit.  I'm clearly the common denominator, but I tend to stand my ground pretty firmly on the issue of updates (open/closed status) on the two restaurant articles and irrelevant minutia on ICA, although I've done very little editing on Hotel Hell.  I doubt the document itself is germane; it strikes me as the result of an image search on Google.  Does that help? --Drmargi (talk) 17:00, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The document is irrelevant (if you on it and then to its Commons' description page you'll see it was added by an experienced editor). If you've got similar edits an SPI could be raised - but only if there was another account, not just IPs. CU only works if there's been a fairly recent account to check. Dougweller (talk) 17:54, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh, that's right (CU). If it's who I suspect, there's an account.  Can this one be block as an SPA? --Drmargi (talk) 19:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Nope, people have the right to be single purpose editors, it's how they edit that is important. Sorry. Dougweller (talk) 20:46, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * That's fine; I just want to understand the boundaries up front. If this is all he/she does, it's not a big deal.  We'll see how it rolls from here.  Thanks for being on your toes.  --Drmargi (talk) 07:05, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, now he's reverting, crying harassment; he's also added the censorship rhetoric to his comments on a couple of AFD's, and it showing signs of becoming disruptive. He's also moved on to hassling User:AussieLegend on his talk page. I need to read the archives from RKN and KN to be sure, but I noticed a grammar quirk makes me think it's an old, problematic "friend". I'll keep you abreast of developments. --Drmargi (talk) 07:40, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Nev 'mind. He's been indeff'd for vandalism by one of your colleagues. --Drmargi (talk) 08:00, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * No question he was going to end up blocked, possibly by me. WP:Point, his !votes at AfDs, etc. would have done it as well as his editwarring. Dougweller (talk) 08:03, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * For the record, I suspect, but am not sure, that this is Roman888, a banned user. The slightly odd wording reminds me of what I saw from him back in the day (he was banned in late 2010, if I remember correctly.) The game-playing and use of policies like WP:HARASS are just his style.  --Drmargi (talk) 08:14, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I had a good read, and I'm as sure as I can be this is User:Roman888 back again. I don't have anything substantive enough to take to SPI; it's all about writing style and rhetoric, but it fits.  He has a long history of socking, of obsession with the two Ramsay articles and with copyright violations, particularly on articles related to Malaysia.  I don't recall him having any history with AussieLegend, but he was socking from Australia when a retired editor and I built the case to ban him, so there may be history there I'm unaware of.  --Drmargi (talk) 17:58, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't recall ever having had anything to do with him until now. --<font style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#fee72c 0em 0em 0.8em,gold -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#1D6B00 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#000000">AussieLegend ( ✉ ) 18:08, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Nothing but paranoia on your part, DrMargi. Doesn't distract from the fact you monopolizing the 2 articles.DrMaggiemee (talk) 05:53, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Ah, so it is you, Roman. I thought so.  You're not very original.  --Drmargi (talk) 07:13, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Conan Doyle
According to http://www.sherlockholmesonline.org/Biography/index.htm, Doyle added his middle name to his surname somewhere between age 17 and 20, if I'm reading correctly. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:04, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Huh. I just recently read something that calls all that into question.  Ah, well, not the hill I want to die on.  --Drmargi (talk) 14:38, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * What was it? This could be interesting... -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:08, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, gad, I'll have to try to find it again. It was something I stumbled across while researching something else.  There's some small mention of the middle name v. last name use of Conan in the article about him.  --Drmargi (talk) 13:26, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Color changes to List of Castle episodes
Perhaps you should change the web colors on the page List of Castle episodes to suit the colors on the spines of the DVD's. So:
 * Season 1-Blue
 * Season 2-Red
 * Season 3-Purple
 * Season 4-Sand


 * File:Castle Season 1 DVD Cover.jpg
 * File:Castle Season 2 DVD Cover.jpg
 * File:Castle Season 3 DVD Cover.jpg
 * File:Castle Season 4 DVD Cover.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexKnightNZ (talk • contribs) 04:16, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Why? They're fine as they are. If you think a change is in order, discuss it on the show's talk page.  --Drmargi (talk) 07:14, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Person of Interest (TV series)
I don't understand why you keep deleting this fact. It's a list of characters. The ultimate fate of characters is often given in such lists. What's the issue with this one? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Two things: first, we don't know for sure that he's dead (and related, that the shooting is a plot-point) and second, his fate is in-universe.  Several other characters are dead, but their outcomes have not been included so that the descriptions are appropriate to a reader watching the show at any time in its timeline, thus avoiding in-universe descriptions.  The reader needs to know who the character is, not what happens to them at some point in their timeline.  --Drmargi (talk) 21:30, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, I don't agree with your argument, but at least now I understand it. But that's why I initially said "apparently", as we won't probably know for sure until next week. Curiously enough, there's a Person of Interest wiki that I ran across last night, which is already speaking of that character in the past tense, in the character's description page. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I can't help what the folks on the wiki are doing. That's fan stuff, and they aren't bound by Wikipedia practices.  Regardless, there's no rush to update Donnelly's description, nor is it critical to note plot points; as his description is written now it is consistent with the others in the article.  Given you've had more than one editor revert this edit, I'd hold off on it for the time being.  --Drmargi (talk) 22:23, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Given the unexpected hostile reaction here, I'm removing it from my watchlist. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:32, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't characterize anyone or anything as hostile. People simply disagree with you.  --Drmargi (talk) 22:41, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Huell
Hi Drmargi, thought I'd mention that while TMZ is a tabloid, it's often cited by other agencies. But more importantly, they did publish a copy of Howser's death cert. Thought I'd drop you a note instead of reverting your edit. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:05, 16 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the thoughtful reply, however... TMZ is still a tabloid, and they have been caught faking documents.  They simply aren't reliable.  --Drmargi (talk) 03:25, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * They've surely delivered incorrect information numerous times to get the scoop, but I'd sure like to know of a case where they've faked a document. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: POI
Good job on it all. Also I say leave machine capitalized, I don't have a problem with that. <b style="color:#0000FF;">QuasyBoy</b> (talk)  02:32, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Little conversation that we just had
Hi! This is Zoopedia who you have indirectly been talking to. I would like to apologize I misread the article from BBC America, and I actually just sent them a message that they might have it wrong. There are lots of different sources all around the internet and as of right now the BBC itself, not their section in America has confirmed it, so to my mind it is just as unconfirmed as Phantom of the Hex. I wish you a nice day I won't do anything else for right now, but I propose that we take it down until the BBC not BBC America, confirms it. Zoopedia
 * What you should do is start a discussion of this issue on the talk page for the article. That way, the (many) involved editors have the opportunity to express an opinion, and we will reach a level of consensus on the matter that will prevent, or a least reduce, further edit warring.  Before you do, since you appear to be fairly new, take the time to read WP:RS and see how sourcing is done.  BBC America runs Doctor Who on the same schedule as the BBC, but often releases broadcast dates long before the BBC does.  As far back as early Season 6, the first source for broadcast dates has often been BBC America, so as much as you might feel the title/date are unconfirmed, for now BBC America is a reliable source and the title/date are good.  Bear in mind, too, that the order of broadcast does change occasionally.  --Drmargi (talk) 22:33, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

The Last Cyberman
Hi. I reverted your edit. I don't want an edit war occurring, so please hear me out. I know the source provided isn't the BBC, but it is an interview with the writer of the episode, Gaiman. Therefore it can be considered reliable because it's "from the horse's mouth", so to say. For another episode, that writen by Thompson for Series 7 part 2, the source given is also an interview with the author. 101090ABC (talk) 19:39, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Doesn't matter. The BBC has to confirm the date, per consensus among the editors of the article.  Den of Geeks is a fan page, and not considered a reliable source.  You should know that the next step was not to revert me (please self-revert), but rather to discuss on the article talk page.  --Drmargi (talk) 20:03, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Even if the information is in an interview with the writer? I'll revert, but I'm starting to think Wikipedia has gone too bureaucratical. 101090ABC (talk) 20:14, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The issue is the site where the interview is reported. I'd open a discussion and see if the gang is willing to go along with the edit.  --Drmargi (talk) 20:21, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand the issues with DoG, but it is a news article referring to (and linking to) an interview with Gaiman. I tried posting the original interview first, but for some reason it didn't work, so I had to rely on DoG. Anyway, I have started a discussion on the talk page. 101090ABC (talk) 20:30, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The answer may be to link to the original news source. Until you mentioned it just now, it sounded to me as though the interview was with the site.  We'll continue on the article page.  --Drmargi (talk) 20:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

A Good Day to Die Hard
Drmargi, I might need help with something on A Good Day to Die Hard. I think the plot of the movie should be kept under warps until it released in America/Canada nationwide February 14th, which is not far from now. But it was released in certain East and Southeast Asian territories on February 7th. I'm kind of concerned that some people in different countries might try to spoil the plot to the American and Canadian editors when they read even though they never saw it before the film is released in February 14, despite what WP:Spoilers says about that. I just thought I should give you a heads up on this. BattleshipMan (talk) 05:07, 9 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up; it's not my type of movie, so no spoiler worries on my account. I'm inclined to agree with your view of when to discuss the plot, but there's not a whole lot that can be done within policy to handle that, unless you invoke WP:IAR.  --Drmargi (talk) 21:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I think we should only do the WP:Spoilers when those films after they are released in some countries, not before. That should be a new rule and policy for the WP:Spoilers. BattleshipMan (talk) 18:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Why not draft it and propose it? --Drmargi (talk) 19:57, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Not a bad idea. But I don't know how to do that in wikipedia. BattleshipMan (talk) 20:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Draft up something in your sandbox, then post it on the project page for discussion, I would imagine. The project TV folks can help.  I'm playing with one defining recurring characters for TV, but haven't had much time to work on it.  --Drmargi (talk) 20:02, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Castle
An editor has been creating episode articles using content that he has copied and pasted from ABCs website. He's also created a number of Nikki Heat and Derrick Storm articles that were also copyvios. I've just spent over two hours cleaning up the mess, and I've left some warnings on his talk page. Hopefully I've gotten through to him but you might care to keep a closer eye on the Castle related articles than normal. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 12:56, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I noticed some of the early edits re:the book series, but hadn't taken a look at them yet. Thanks for the heads up! I'll keep an eye peeled. --Drmargi (talk) 13:27, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

List of Hart of Dixie episodes
There's an update to the discussion at Talk:List of Hart of Dixie episodes about splitting the article that you may wish to comment on, since you've previously commented there. Same old thing. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 12:31, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail
Hello Drmargi. It was so good to hear from you again. I am glad that you wrote and I sent a reply. I have been dying to let you know that this version of The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie has recently been released on DVD. It was extraordinary to see it again after more than 30 years. It contains a fine performance by Geraldine MacEwan. I have followed the career (as much as possible anyway) of Lynsey Baxter ever since seeing her as Sandy in this series. As I scanned through IMDb it looks like she is the only one of the young ladies playing the students that stayed in the acting profession. I forgot to mention in my email that the first season of Person of Interest is finally on its way to me as Amazon greatly reduced its price for the Prsident's Day weekend. Cheers to you and enjoy your Sunday. MarnetteD | Talk 07:04, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Ooh! Sounds good!  I'll give my pal a heads up, too.  Got your e-mail, but am headed for bed, so will answer in the AM.  Can't wait to chat about POI, too.  Are you watching the second season?  --Drmargi (talk) 08:34, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * You bet I am. Lots of interesting stuff. The way they seed plot points in one ep that don't bear fruit until weeks later is a treat. My only worry is that Fusco is starting to be used as comic relief a bit too often. On the other hand his storyline is fraught with danger and I hope that they don't bump him off. Enjoy your week. MarnetteD | Talk 23:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I constantly worry they'll either bump off Fusco or push him too hard. Reese seems to be letting up on him, and giving him a few treats (the model), recently, and he seems to be gaining more confidence.  And oh, lordy, the end of the last episode.  Never thought we'd see Root where she is, and never though John would take Zoe up on her innuendo quite so quickly.  What a hoot!  I love Zoe; wish they'd use her more often.  --Drmargi (talk) 23:21, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Sad news
You might have already seen this but I just found out about the passing of Richard Briers tonight. The Good Life aka Good Neighbors was one of my faves all the way through college. I also enjoy The Norman Conquests and his work in Branagh's Shakespeare films. I was interested to learn several years ago that his voice was dubbed over Jean-Pierre Cassel's in The Three Musketeers (1973 live-action film) and its sequel. I know that it is a fact of life but it is hard losing these special actors. Thank heavens we have so many of their performances recorded for posterity. Best regards. MarnetteD | Talk 03:20, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, I saw that yesterday when Steven Fry tweeted about it. And then Simon Ward today!  The Duke of Buckingham in the same film.  Gad!  --Drmargi (talk) 08:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

WP:3RR
May I remind you, you are not allowed to make more than three reverts on a single page in less than 24-hours. You made 5 reverts on The New Normal page. That does infact count as edit warring if you're going to revert other people's edits. Have a nice day <font color="#FF0000">Jay <font color="#0000FF">Jay What did I do? 15:32, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Now the page has been fully protect, so now nobody can edit the page. Thanks <font color="#FF0000">Jay <font color="#0000FF">Jay What did I do? 17:01, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't give Drmargi all the credit. It takes two to edit-war. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 17:19, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You've got nerve, JayJay, I'll give you that. Before you school someone for edit warring, take a look at the first two edits, which were entirely unrelated to your table, and handled amicably.  The last three, not were in relation to your table, the second and third of which didn't need to have happened had you simply engaged in discussion instead of having an edit tantrum when your table was removed.  Even after being asked to a) stop reverting per WP:BRD, something the community expects you to do, and b) being more explicitly told that an article stays at the stable version during a content dispute, you kept reverting.  Once I removed the table, challenging the edit, your job was to discuss, not revert, and the burden was on you to gain consensus to include the table.  You chose to do otherwise and as we said in junior high school, started the whole thing. Get out a mirror, have a look at yourself, and then say thanks.  (Not sure I see the point of the page protection made over eight hours after the whole thing stopped, though.) --Drmargi (talk) 18:20, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

A couple Dr Who merchandise treats for your perusal
In our continuing celebrations of this 50th anniversary year I thought pass these links on for your enjoyment. First is this print by Al Hirschfeld. Copies of this were available for a short period of time back in the late 80s or early 90s. Sadly my budget didn't stretch to it at the time. Next is this gem. If you zoom in on some of the pics you'll see Leela and Bessie among many others. The Master seems to be a mix of Delgado - mostly - and Ainley - the costume. I did get to play it once. Unfortunately, it was on a business trip to Minneapolis so I didn't get enough time to get used to the way it combined any Dr Who storylines with its gameplay. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 20:01, 23 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Coooooool stuff! I'm looking for just the right tzochki to remember the fiftieth.  --Drmargi (talk) 02:36, 25 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Glad that you liked them. This was my Xmas gift to myself. Cute as they can be I actually like them better than the more accurate ones seen here . I hope that you have a superb week. MarnetteD | Talk 05:24, 25 February 2013 (UTC)


 * You'll laugh -- I've got my eye peeled for Doctor Who Pez dispensers. ;-)  Have a fab week yourself! --Drmargi (talk) 05:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)


 * That would be {deep Cyberman voice from the 80s} EXCELLENT. A shame they haven't produced them already. I am wondering of the boys from Top Gear will do a segment on Dr Who vehicles in homor of the anniversary. I know there aren't enough to do a whole show the way they did with the Bond cars but they could do Bessie and the Whomobile as well as the TARDIS and (maybe) some of the vehicles UNIT drove. MarnetteD | Talk 05:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

POI Characters
Hi its DanDud88 where are those character profiles for Person of Interest you said you were doing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanDud88 (talk • contribs)
 * Oh, so now I hear from you. It's a customary courtesy to respond to a post on your talk page, which you didn't do, so I didn't worry about how much time I took with them.  They're in my sandbox.  Reese is nearly finished, Finch is still a work in progress; when you didn't respond to my post, I figured you didn't care one way or the other, so I didn't rush.  (BTW, in future please: a. sign your posts and b. be careful to take a little less demanding tone with another editor; this is a volunteer effort, life happens and writing gets done when it gets done.) Anyway, they're pretty thorough, and I ended up needing to go back and watch a couple episodes, but they'll get done.  --Drmargi (talk) 11:20, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry i didnt mean to come of as demanding i just thought u got held up doing other stuff, and i didnt reply to your post on my talk page because i didnt think u needed someone elses permission/encouragement to edit wikipedia. user:DanDud88
 * It's not a question of needing your permission. It's a question of simply courtesy -- I let you know what I was doing to save you hassle, and in polite society, that at least merits a response, so I knew we were on the same page.  --Drmargi (talk) 03:15, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: POI yellow box
Gosh, I don't know. If I were to guess, I would say the yellow boxes are for people who know about the Machine. <b style="color:#0000FF;">QuasyBoy</b> (talk)  18:29, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Cool, That was a GREAT episode wasn't it. <b style="color:#0000FF;">QuasyBoy</b> (talk)  18:55, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


 * OMG, was it ever! We needed to see how the "other half" operates at this point in the story, so it was well timed.  It was funny reading the comments following the online reviews; some people had a heart attack about one episode messing with the formula, others loved it, no in between.  A couple thought it was a spin-off pilot, but I very much doubt that.  --Drmargi (talk) 19:34, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * As I was watching it, I thought it was a backdoor pilot as well, but then I remembered that it was reported weeks ago, that Sarah Shahi was going to recur, and even if they were setting up for a spin-off, it would have been announced in advance before the episode aired. Depending how strong of a character Samantha Shaw is, I think a spin-off is possible with her. By the way, she is such an AWESOME character, can't wait to see more of her. <b style="color:#0000FF;">QuasyBoy</b> (talk)  22:12, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I doubt very much it's a pilot, although things can change. Rather, I think this is the way in to really finding out what Special Counsel and his band of bad boys is up to from their POV.  Speaking of which, did Alicia Corwin work for the National Security Council or the National Security Agency?  NSA is an agency (obviously), NSC is a committee, in essence, so NSA makes more sense, but I'd swear the show said NSC.  Can you recall?  BTW, I'm working on an article about John Reese, and would appreciate some feedback once it's done, hopefully tomorrow night or Tuesday.  --Drmargi (talk) 02:34, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * About the NSA/NSC thing, I wouldn't know off the top of my head. Also, I can't wait to see what the Reese article will look like. <b style="color:#0000FF;">QuasyBoy</b> (talk)  03:14, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Good excuse to crack out the DVD's! I'll leave it as is for now, because I think I changed it right after seeing an episode, but I'll double-check in time.  I'll give you a heads up as soon as the article is done.  --Drmargi (talk) 05:15, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Coolness <b style="color:#0000FF;">QuasyBoy</b> (talk)  06:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Reese article
OK Quasy and MarnetteD, a rough version of the Reese article, minus links and full sourcing, is done. It still needs the end of the section about Finch finished (I have notes, and will do it later tonight), as well as a section on Reese's skills and Carter/Fusco, but I think we can go to press with what's there, and develop it once it's gone live. Would you take a peek and let me know what you think? --Drmargi (talk) 03:14, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I left some thoughts I hope they are of some help. I started working my way through all 7 seasons of Lewis to find Colin Dexter's cameos. Would you please remind me what you know about the letters in the credits that spell out other words. I am halfway through season 2 and, so far, the credits have only had white letters. Maybe the thing you are aware of is in later seasons. Cheers and enjoy your weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 04:12, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I only just noticed that I left out an thought in my sentence "same phrasing like that which is why a Thesaurus is always close at hand" - it should have read "same phrasing in the same paragraph" - of course, most writing would include the same phrasing in the body of a larger article. That is what I get for typing when the sandman is calling. :-) Only four weeks to new Doctor episodes!!!! MarnetteD | Talk 21:33, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I understood what you meant. That's the kind of feedback that is so helpful.  We read and reread what we write so much that we don't see those repetitions, most of which come from getting ideas out ahead of best phrasing, and in truth, they bug the beans out of me, too.  I'm adding one last section about the evolution of The Man in the Suit and law enforcement, then I'll give it one last good read-through, stop obsessing over it, and let it go.  I want do add some other bits and pieces such as a discussion of Zoe, but it's time to set it free!  ;-) --Drmargi (talk) 20:52, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

We need a new userbox
Hi D. I saw this addition to your userpage and I think we may need an enhanced version that includes the phrase "and is equally fluent in British English :-) Cheers and have a good week or at least one that is stress free! MarnetteD | Talk 01:51, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * We cross-talked! I was posting on your talk page when you were posting on mine -- a psychic connection.  I like your idea;  it can be added by editing after the vertical bar.  Give me a minute... --Drmargi (talk) 01:53, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, go look. (Are you watching Top Gear?  I am!) --Drmargi (talk) 01:56, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks good. Now we have to work on our Geordie. That is the only accent that I haven't improved in being able to tell what they are saying. You bet I am watching the new season of TG (and I am almost caught up on past seasons thru repeats.) As I mentioned above I am hopeful that they do a segment on Dr Who transportation. :-) MarnetteD | Talk 02:01, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * A Top Gear Doctor Who special? Be still my heart.  I'm not that lucky, especially after the Bond one.  Did I tell you I got to see the Ian Fleming exhibit in honor of the anniversary of his hundredth birthday in London?  Amazing; all sorts of iconic items from the films except Odd Job's bowler.  My childhood and adolescence in display cases, and the spirit of my Dad along with me.  It was amazing.


 * Geordie isn't too bad; Robson Green is my baseline. Are you getting DCI Banks with Steven Tompkinson?  It's really, really good.  --Drmargi (talk) 02:20, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Although I can understand RG I have to tell ya that when I was hitchhiking around the "Sceptered Isle" many moons ago the ride I got from a Geordie truck driver was the only one where I had to nod and smile and hope that he did not realise that I was only getting every tenth word :-) Hooray for getting to see the Fleming exhibit and the wonderful memories. Another hooray happened tonight when Lesley Nicol - Mrs Padmore - had a guest role on Once Upon a Time. and I finally twigged to the fact that she was the lady that Edmund tried to sell his house to in the Blackadder II episode "Money" way back when. Fun stuff and it is only Sunday - good start to the week. MarnetteD | Talk 03:22, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * My Waterloo is the Cornwall accent. I ran into a couple from there while I was in Barcelona, and couldn't understand a word they said!  Heavy Scouse can be pretty rough, too. Darn!  I missed Lesley Nicol's episode.  I don't watch the show, but wanted to see her.  Good thing I have the ABC viewer app on my iPad.  I did watch Red Widow -- for Goran Visnjic.  How shallow am I? --Drmargi (talk) 08:00, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Not shallow at all - we all have our guilty pleasures :-) 29 episodes of Poldark - especially Judd and Prudy - helped lay a base for my grasp of Cornish. Scouse can be rough - Lister from Red Dwarf helps there though his is pretty tame. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 13:49, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Just found out that Dead Head (TV series) is coming out in DVD in April. A very trippy series from the mid 80's it contains some marvelous performances and a storyline that keeps messing with your perceptions of what is going on. I admit it is not going to be everyone's cup of tea but I thought I would let you know about it. MarnetteD | Talk 19:03, 4 March 2013 (UTC)]]


 * OOOh. I'll have to check that out.  Joan would love it, too.  Very up her alley.  I wonder if BBCA will get it.  Meanwhile, I finally got to start the final season of Hustle tonight.  Love that show!  --Drmargi (talk) 07:43, 5 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I see now that it's older. Might be worth checking out, at least if it finds its way onto Netflix.  --Drmargi (talk) 02:03, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the coffe, and in return ...
I speak native English, but I'm not considered to be a native here, where the natives speak English but the native language is.....well, nobody really knows. It's all so confusing. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 08:47, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


 * You two kill me!


 * I'm on a roll. Three pieces of Wikilove in three days.  There'll be no living with me.  It's DENCH!  --Drmargi (talk) 08:57, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Just in case
I know you have my talk page on your watchlist but I wanted to make sure that you got to read (and see the links provided) the info that Redrose has left me today at this thread User talk:MarnetteD. Cheers MarnetteD | Talk 18:14, 7 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Mille grazie for the heads up! I dove into the discussion, and added a little tangental anecdote about the streets of Westwood. Rain due all day tomorrow.  Perfect excuse to make cottage pie and a nice pot of tea.  --Drmargi (talk) 08:55, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi again. I don't know if you have ever encountered this article BBC Television Shakespeare in you wanderings here at WikiP. Recently User:‎Bertaut has done some excellent work expanding it. I don't know if you followed the series like I did back in the 70's and 80's but B's work has taught me even more than I knew about the series at the time. Cheers and 2+ weeks and counting!!! MarnetteD | Talk 04:12, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I saw that on your talk page earlier. I'll check it out.  Two weeks and counting; will miss Ripper Street! --Drmargi (talk) 07:24, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Problems with a user
Hello. First off, I applaud you for how you handled the abuse you received from the user AdamDeanHall, but unfortunately this user has been doing (and getting away with) things like that for a long, long time. He has extremely severe issues with control, and has claimed ownership over many articles, such as this one. It's got to the point where he won't tolerate any edit or contribution made to that article that wasn't done by him, and his edit summaries are terrible. For example, when someone wrote that the Dinobots were going to be in the show's third series (which hasn't been officially confirmed), rather than saying something like "Removed a piece of information that has no reliable source and has not been officially confirmed" he wrote "Me Grimlock not know if Dinobots appear in third season". And even though it has been revealed via a trailer from Singapore that the character Ultra Magnus will be introduced in the third season, he still removed every mention of Ultra Magnus from the article with the summary "Ultra Magnus?!! But I was expecting Hot Rod aka Rodimus Prime!"

This sort of behaviour from this user has been going on for ages. He's an aggressive and childish control freak who treats the above-mentioned article like his own personal fan-site, and probably does so for a lot of other articles too. He's raged at me in the past for using the plot summaries from Zap2it in the article (something I didn't realise was inappropriate at the time) and yet he seems to have no problems with them now. But the worst thing is he never gets in any kind of trouble for his actions. He's never been banned or blocked for this inappropriate behaviour, he only gets mild warnings that he doesn't pay attention to. I think this sort of thing is completely unacceptable and I don't know what can be done about it. MunkkyNotTrukk (talk) 09:51, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I've had a couple go-rounds with him about the same issues. He's gotten worse lately, so I put the message on his talk page.  If it continues, you can do the same, and if he's not responsive, consider taking it to WP:ANI.  I wouldn't expect a lot to come of ANI, frankly, and it could come back to bite you if your own behavior isn't pristine (the boomerang, as they call it), but it is an option.  I find contacting an admin is the best way to deal with these problems if they get out of hand.  --Drmargi (talk) 23:20, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Go On
You obviously don't need a source saying that a song plays in the opening of a show when it's not a variation, not a version, not a soundalike. Listen to the song. See the opening. It's just there. Why would you need somebody else saying "Oh, it's really that song"?? - 187.20.77.187 (talk) 01:23, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * See WP:RS. That's why.  No source, no include, especially when it's as short a clip as the show uses.  --Drmargi (talk) 02:18, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you are being overprotective with that. Like I said, listen to the song, see the opening: it's just there. This is good information people will turn to the article in search for. After they read it there, they'll correctly know what song to look for. On a side note: the WP:RS link you provide says absolutely nothing about theme songs. Another thing I can suggest: if you're not happy with the line, do not destroy it. You want sources? Look for one yourself, make it more Wikipedia-compliant and keep the valuable info there where it belongs. You're not happy with its placement? Move it around. I wouldn't care at all, of course. Destroying it for the sake of completely stupid preciousness, now that's the wrong thing to do. - 187.20.77.187 (talk) 22:06, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Not to mention... Well, where do the "ShortSummary" sections come from? They don't have refs. And they can't be copied from anywhere else. As far as I can tell, they come from people watching the episode and then writing about it. Isn't it absolutely the same? - 187.20.77.187 (talk) 22:34, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * One problem. You're assuming everyone recognizes the song.  I don't, nor am I familiar with the artists.  It's my prerogative to request a source when I feel information needs it.  This is not analogous to writing post-broadcast summaries.  If this music is what you claim, surely the band will have mentioned it on their website.  There's your source.  --Drmargi (talk) 23:18, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not at all assuming that everyone knows the song. Where did you get that impression from?? It's actually the opposite: I'm trying to put that information up so that people will know what song it is when they watch the opening and try to identify it, if they want. I wasn't familiar with the song until a few days ago (when I first posted it), and I'm sure not familiar with The New Pornographers. Up to that same day, I only knew they existed. And this doesn't make any difference whatsoever. Like I said, you want a source? Search for the opening and for the song title in YouTube and see they match. You and everybody else who want to identify that song will be one hundred percent pleased with the search results, knowing that, well, it actually is that song. If you find it's different, just then you remove the false information. BTW, this is not "analogous" to the post-broadcast summaries; it's absolutely the same. I see something that is true, I report that something, period. What if I start demanding a source telling me what is described in Wikipedia is actually what happened in each episode? Where does that information come from? I can't trust Wikipedia alone for that, or post-broadcast summaries written by whoever did it... can I? And finally, I'm absolutely baffled with your assumption that a band, any band, would necessarily report the usage of a song in a show opening. It's simply not like this, it doesn't happen that way, that simply does not exist. And why would you think it does?? Again, completely stupid preciousness only. You could contribute to Wikipedia. Instead, you're choosing to take away from it. - 187.20.77.187 (talk) 20:01, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hope you are well
Hi D. It seems Mr Reese and Mr Finch - with all their talents - cannot keep college Basketball off their network :-) I hope that the pangs of POI withdrawals are not too bothersome. At least it is only 9 days to new Dr episodes!!! The Pertwee tribute the next night includes The Spearhead from Space - not a bad choice but I wish that the had chosen Terror of the Autons so that we could see a Roger Delgado performance during this anniversary year - though I'm sure he will be mentioned in the Dr Who Remembered section it wont be quite the same. Any way I hope you are well and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 02:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey, M! My Bruins made #6 in the South, so we'll see how that goes, but I do miss Mr. Finch and Mr. Reese. Blessed be DVD's at times like this.  And the Doctor commeth, along with Call the Midwife and Mr. Selfridge. so there's plenty to anticipate.  I don't remember the Doctor quite this early, and only spottily from the early days, so it's all fun.  Hope this finds you well, too.  Busy weekend for me, then a week off! --Drmargi (talk) 05:34, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I just got started on my POI DVDs the other day. Thank goodness the technology exists. A series this intricate needs rewatching. There are so many little things that I missed the first time through or, perhaps more importantly, things I saw but didn't know that they were part of the story - like the camera blinking at Reese at the end of the pilot. I am looking forward to seeing the alternate pilot episode but am saving it until I am done with the other episodes. I also received my Ripper Street DVDs yesterday and they have some interesting extras. Enjoy your week off!!!! MarnetteD | Talk 18:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Just finished a bit of a dicker with another editor about what constitutes the Machine. I argue it's the mainframe, firmware and software; he thinks its an AI (versus having AI).  The show's being very vague about it all, but why call it what they did if it's just an intelligence without physical form?  That's the stuff of many viewings, long discussion and a couple good bottles of wine alone.  And then there's all the plot lines.  It's never dull!  I'd been toying with buying Ripper Street -- let me know what you think of the extras.  I'm also on the fence about Sherlock for the same reason.  --Drmargi (talk) 21:00, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll let you know about Ripper Street when I get to it - I just had a flash - you can do a little over 100 years of time travel if you view RS and then watch WhiteChapel :) I would recommend getting Sherlock when it fits the budget. There are some wonderful tidbits in the commentaries and the first season disks include an unaired pilot that has some distinct differences from the one we see. MarnetteD | Talk 21:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, that's funny! I hadn't thought about that!  Looking forward to Whitechapel when it returns, whenever that might be.  Do you have those DVDs?  Meanwhile, UPS just dropped my Les Miz DVD off at the door.   Incentive to get my grades done! --Drmargi (talk) 21:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes I have them. The extras are on the minimal side. In the case of this series I picked up seasons 2 and 3 before they aired on BBCA. Lack of patience and my dislike of commercial breaks being the main reasons. On the other hand I have found that if if you are willing to wait a year or so after their release on DVD prices on Amazon UK tend to go down - dramatically in some instances - seasons 1 and 2 of Whitechapel are now available for under ten pounds. BTW the second season of W inspired me to pick up The Krays (film). The film is well done in its own right and the DVD includes an excellent documentary about the real life twins. Enjoy your weekend with singing and stalking in revolutionary France :-D We are supposed to get some snow so I may have to curl up with my bluray of The Hobbit Pt 1 after the basketball, Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 21:42, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Dashing out the door now, so will answer more later. However, I keep meaning to ask if you've seen the Podcast of Interest?  --Drmargi (talk) 21:58, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I just looked them up. They look quite interesting. I know that there are all sorts of things like this on the net that I don't take advantage of. I'm just about to log off also so if I get sidetracked tonight I will look forward to reading your message tomorrow. MarnetteD | Talk 22:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * They're a lot of fun in that geek-boy, nerdist sort of way. The podcast for Relevance is especially funny in places.  They tend to get off on related (or not so related) tangents near the end of many of them, but they have some interesting theories about the Machine.


 * Oh, and The Krays. A brutal film, but a compelling watch, and a far cry from Spandau Ballet for the Kemp brothers.  I just watched the episode of Spooks that Martin was in; lots of Kray winks in it.  (Want a chuckle?  The original video for "True" is on YouTube.  Then, look up pretty Tony Hadley's article herein, and heave a sigh. We are not as young as we used to be...)


 * Hope the snow isn't too bad. We have our community Easter egg roll, complete with food trucks, tomorrow so I may mosey up there for a bit in the AM, then hit Starbucks and finish grading some exams.  Then, it's me, Hugh and Kevin Spacey next week.  Eeee!  --Drmargi (talk) 11:02, 23 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Sadly nobody is as young as they used to be - teehee. My fave performance in The Krays is Billie Whitelaw as the boys mum. Back in the late 80's she appeared on the stage at the Denver University campus with two gentlemen performing readings from plays, short stories and poems. I was lucky enough to be in the audience. I will check out the videos you recommend when I get a chance. Sounds like you have a wonderful week set up. Naturally BBCA is doing a Matt Smith Dr marathon leading up to next Sat's new ep if you need catching up. I look forward to your thoughts on Spacey's HoC. MarnetteD | Talk 19:03, 23 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Just wanted to let you know I started the Ripper Street DVDs and each episode is at least 62 minutes long. Even though BBCA gave them a 75 minute slot on their first showing that still means that I am getting to view at least 5 minutes worth of scenes that I didn't get to see before! Some scenes are just longer (and some a little bloodier) but some add to the background of the various characters. This still might not be enough to entice you to buy the series (which is cheaper in this initial release on Amazon US for once!) but might spur you to rent it through netflix or another company like that. We got more than a foot of snow. Oof I am getting to old for all this shoveling. MarnetteD | Talk 04:57, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Also forgot to mention that one of the reason I am enjoying RS is that it hearkens back to Joss Whedon's Firefly. Especially in its language and its music and even in the shifting motivations of its characters. Once again, Enjoy your week off. MarnetteD | Talk 05:32, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Did you see?
Watched ep 4 of POI "Cura Te Ipsum" last night and was pleasantly surprised to see Adam Rothenberg as the creepy villain. A person could be forgiven for not seeing Homer Jackson from Ripper Street - he was clean cut and he only had a couple lines until his final scene with Reese where we got a better chance to hear his gravely voice. MarnetteD | Talk 15:40, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes! A pal and I are getting into AR these days.  He was also on Elementary, playing Joan's ex-BF, but in a smaller role.  He is such an interesting actor, and the character in Ripper Street is really unusual.  Usually American characters feel forced, but he fits nicely into the rag-tag fabric of the story.  I just love that show!

Speaking of did you see, did you see POI was renewed today? It was never really in doubt, but nice to have confirmed all the same! --Drmargi (talk) 01:03, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Good news - thanks for letting me know. MarnetteD | Talk 04:08, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

What a weekend
Hi D. Just finished watching Mr Selfridge and all I can say is what a lot of fun!!! Breezy storytelling and a total delight. Between new Dr Who, new GoT, new Masterpiece and new Mad Men to come next Sunday all I can say is that the calendar seems to have flipped. In the 60's and 70's it was the fall where we anticipated new and returning programs. Have a great week. MarnetteD | Talk 04:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, yes, yes! Do you also watch "Call the Midwife"?  We had a marathon of S1 all day, perfect fodder on a quiet Sunday.  Oh, and have you seen the previews for "The Bletchley Circle"?  Wow!  --Drmargi (talk) 06:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Our PBS station hasn't shown CtM yet so I will keep my fingers x'd. We did get DCI Banks and before that seasons 1-3 of Doc Marten and I enjoyed them both. I am looking forward to TBC as I have read a couple books about breaking the Enigma code machine over the years. Also Spies of Warsaw starts this Wednesday. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 15:40, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Bletchley is fascinating; I got a quick tour with a pal during my last trip to England. No CtM yet?  BUMMER!  It's fabulous.  Heidi Thomas writes such fully-realized women characters (see: Cranford).  I loved DCI Banks; best new procedural in ages!  We get Doc Martin on a loop along with several other shows (Hustle, MI-5, Foyle's War, etc.), and have George Gently (about S3) in the time slot DCIB was in right now.  Spies of Warsaw should be fantastic!  BTW, did you know David Tennant can sing?  I discovered that last night when the caffeine from my Easter tea was keeping me awake.  Blees YouTube on my iPad.  --Drmargi (talk) 16:10, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I had heard about his singing before though I can't remember where. I especially enjoyed the duet with Catherine Tate from Much Ado... I would guess that, like me, you enjoy where you live, but there are times that I wish I lived in the UK. I would really have enjoyed being in the audience to see the Dr and Donna as Beatrice and Benedick!!! Almost done with season 1 of POI and I've noticed that the machines year indicator goes forward as well. Do you think we will ever get a story that happens in the future? MarnetteD | Talk 16:51, 2 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I wondered about the future story as well. I can't see how, but then, that's why I'm not a script writer.  Word is, the counter didn't go above 2012 until they were renewed.  I never noticed, but it's fun to think it might be the case.  Can't wait to hear what your favorite episode(s) are, etc.  --Drmargi (talk) 17:06, 3 April 2013 (UTC)


 * As a life long credits reader another reason I appreciate the DVDs is getting to read (and pause if needed) the end credits. Have you noticed that JJ Abrams gets a credit for writing the opening theme music? Is there anything he can't do :-) MarnetteD | Talk 17:52, 3 April 2013 (UTC)


 * In the case of a story set in the future I did have a vision of a Rashomon style story - ala we see a present day event and then we flash to the future and see how each character relates that event through their differing perceptions. Oh and if Jonathan Nolan is one of your talk page watchers I just put a copyright on that idea. HeeHee. MarnetteD | Talk 17:58, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

For your perusal
Thanks for your post regarding TotS. In a rather interesting and spooky coincidence I was reading various articles at this website when I heard the news of Roger Ebert's passing. In particular this was a marvelous place to see a variety of films. This was one of several movie palaces in downtown Denver that I spent hours in as a youngster. I hope the site has an article or two about theatres that you might have been in. Thumbs down to Ebert's passing but thumbs way way up to his life and career. MarnetteD | Talk 23:37, 4 April 2013 (UTC)


 * On a much lighter note I think you will find some of these fun as well. MarnetteD | Talk 01:10, 5 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Ebert's passing is such a shame! He was the rare reviewer who was actually worth listening to.  And his passing was so sudden.  Glad to help with the ToS business.  What on earth would make anyone think that play isn't as sexist as all get-out?  And of course, your afternoon visitor was, uh, interesting.  I've come to the conclusion you need to purchase Troll be GoneRegisteredTM.svg in industrial sized containers.  --Drmargi (talk) 03:40, 5 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I was lucky enough to get to talk with him at a panel discussion at the Denver International Film Festival back in the mid 80s and his book "A Memoir" is worth the read. A 55 gallon drum of Troll-be-GoneRegisteredTM.svg - good idea - but I may need a bigger place to store it :-) MarnetteD | Talk 03:50, 5 April 2013 (UTC)


 * OH, neat! He must have been very interesting!  Are you expanding your TbG line to include new scents?  I see jasmine was employed today, and I see you have a citrus variety.  I could go for something along the line of sandalwood, if you're taking requests. ;-)  How about POI and Elementary last night???!!!  --Drmargi (talk) 07:04, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


 * They were an exciting watch. The enemies in PoI feel like they might be too big for our team to handle but, since they've been renewed for another season, our heroes must prevail in some fashion. As to new scents I am in negotiations with this wonderful firm to add some natural woody fragrances :) Seriously though this company makes some of the best incense I have ever used. Their pinon scent is almost like being in Santa Fe on Christmas Eve when the smoke from bonfires of that fragrant wood fill the air. MarnetteD | Talk 07:18, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, you're making me crazy! I adore New Mexico; a good, good friend lives in Albuquerque.  That pinon scent is to die for -- I'll have to check them out.  You'll need a TbG of the month club, sort of like Harry and David, at this rate.   (BTW, reg. mark is now in superscript; my contribution to your corporate development.)  I have no idea what they're heading for, or who the heck Greer is, much less talking to.  And where is Root in all this?  Sigh...  I have a feeling the season finale will be a bit like the Doctor Who episodes where the whole RTD brigade flew the earth back home; all hands on deck!  The Podcast of Interest is ready to listen to, so I'm off to bed with my headphones and iPad.  --Drmargi (talk) 07:31, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Did you ever?
I know that you and Tom Lehrer teach in different fields and in different parts of the state but did you ever meet him? Although I was young at the time I remember tuning into That Was The Week That Was in its brief American incarnation just to hear him. I love the fact that he knew that teaching was his vocation over entertaining. It was a kick last year when Daniel Radcliff sang The Elements (song) when he was a guest on The Graham Norton Show. Here is a link to a fun animation of the song. Two+ hours to the Doctor!! Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 21:18, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Never met him, more's the shame. He's still up in Santa Cruz as far as I know.  I love to use the Elements Song when I can in class; what a kick!  I am SO ready for the Doctor!! --Drmargi (talk) 22:26, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Your students are lucky to get to hear it! I got a DVD of some of his non-TW3 TV performances through the years a while ago. It includes a performance for in Norway which is odd to watch as the audience politely smiles but rarely laughs. One last Ebert item. I think that it is a wonderful coincidence that he and one of films iconic characters were both born in Urbana Illinois. Do you know who the second one is? MarnetteD | Talk 23:11, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Forgot to mention. I love the way the video includes the elements that "hadn't been discovered" when he wrote the song. MarnetteD | Talk 23:13, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

The Following
Not that it matters anymore because the character is no longer listed under 'recurring', but yes, we did watch Jordy Raines die. We watched him commit suicide by unraveling his cast and ingesting it to induce asphyxiation. I was right, and your edit rationale was not. TimidObserver (talk) 17:23, 11 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Whaaaat? This is ancient history, and you're considering a single edit out of time and context.  --Drmargi (talk) 20:48, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


 * The timing may be late, but the context is precise. You edited my edit saying that we did not watch him die. That was simply untrue and I don't appreciate someone editing my edits under false claims. TimidObserver (talk) 20:55, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Whatever. I wouldn't have made the edit if it didn't seem appropriate at the time.  Regardless, as I said before, it's ancient history.  Time to get over it.  --Drmargi (talk) 21:02, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Michael's Restaurant
It's formally called "Michael's Restaurant" on their website in their mailing address and appears to be the formal name in several sources. It's also the appropriate disambiguated name for a new article about the topic. In any case, it is bad form to remove red links as they are useful and important. What was your reasoning? Viriditas (talk) 09:26, 13 April 2013 (UTC)


 * My reasoning? History with the restaurant.  It was never known as anything but Michael's.  But neither is this a hill I want to die on, so go with what the website says.  --Drmargi (talk) 14:45, 13 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I think you may have misunderstood me. I'm not looking for fight; I'm looking for a solution.  To start with, Michael's redirects to an arts and crafts retail chain.  I don't even know if that is correct, but we will assume that is for the moment.  If we wanted to create one article on the two restaurants (Santa Monica and New York locations), how would you disambiguate the name?  Also, I think it is a good idea to add red links. Viriditas (talk) 21:17, 13 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, I understood that; no worries. I should have used a better metaphor!  But neither do I think it's important enough to split semantic hairs.  If the website says Michael's restaurant then go with that.  Local usage isn't always correct, and you can verify the name you used.  And sorry, I should have restored the red link.  That was just an oversight on my part.  --Drmargi (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2013 (UTC)


 * It is probably best if I ask the dab project for help. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 01:35, 14 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Update: I'm using Michael's (restaurant) as the proposed dab title. Viriditas (talk) 08:17, 14 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Works for me! --Drmargi (talk) 02:38, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

ANI KahnJohn etc.
Thanks Drmargi for the taking the time to talk to me on my talk page, and clearing up a few things. You are most welcome there, as is any editor who wishes to talk to me. I take everything you say as a reasonable explanation. This was my first time on an ANI I didn't know the rules. I apologize if you deemed my own input inappropriate. I also apologize for getting MarnetteD's gender wrong. People were calling him "she" and I thought "Marnette" was a girl's name. I acknowledge my mistakes and I apologize. -- <font face="Calibri" color="blue" size="3.5px">Jodon | <font face="Calibri" color="blue" size="3.5px"> Talk  15:38, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Thankyou
for reverting this. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 21:49, 19 April 2013 (UTC)


 * My pleasure. You've done the same for me, more than once.  --Drmargi (talk) 03:16, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Did you know
Hello D. I just saw an interview with Alan Cummings on the Colbert Report. Did you know that he was appearing in this unique version of Macbeth? It looks fascinating and I'll bet it would be a powerful performance to see. If only I had enough air miles built up - or any for that matter. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 04:46, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No! That sounds fabulous! I'd love to see it.  sigh... --Drmargi (talk) 13:31, 18 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I am wondering if this cable station is available in your area. It airs news programs from various countries around the world during the day then at night it airs mystery/detective programs from various European countries including France (Maigret with Bruno Cremer) - Sweden (Wallander with Krister Henriksson - one from Denmark set in the 1700's whose name escapes me at the moment - several from Italy of varying quality - and one that has caught my attention called Blood of the Vine about a wine expert who gets caught up in solving murders. The station is associated with PBS and is connected to our second PBS station. I know that you are probably busy enough without adding any more TV stations to watch but I thought I would let you know about it anyway. Here is a link to their Facebook page . Enjoy your weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 21:53, 19 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure; I don't think so, but I'll have a look, and check out the Facebook page. It's a shame if we don't -- it sounds great!  I'm back from checking the website: KCET is on the list; that's our non PBS PBS station (long story), and it's affiliated.  Now, to find it! --Drmargi (talk) 03:18, 20 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I forgot to mention that it is listed as CPTWV in my cable menu. That stands for Colorado Public Television World Vision. It might be the same for you since you cable provider might substitute in California. Another way to track it down would be to use your program search function to find a specific program. Try Don Matteo or Maigret. Oh and I also just found this that might help . Can you believe that Tim Curry turned 67 today? I wonder if that means that Dr Frank-n-Furter now wears support hose instead of fishnet stockings :-) MarnetteD | Talk 03:50, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I found it! I'll have to check out the programming over the weekend. Tim Curry is 67? SERIOUSLY? Makes me feel ancient! --Drmargi (talk) 04:38, 20 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Here is a little WP:OR about the current season that you might find interesting Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Doctor Who MarnetteD | Talk 21:35, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * This is freaking amazing isn't it? MarnetteD | Talk 04:23, 22 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes! So is KJ, but not in a good way.  There are meds for conditions like that.  And that warning.  I'm trying to decide whether it violates WP:NLT or not.  Love MOP's new name, too.  I laughed like a drain.


 * On another subject, OMFG was Bletchley Circle good! --Drmargi (talk) 07:09, 22 April 2013 (UTC)


 * It most certainly was. As mentioned in the "making of" that was shown after the ep it was wonderful to see a story where it was the women that were getting back together after going their separate ways. Wonderful acting all round. MarnetteD | Talk 14:11, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Apology
In an effort of good faith, I apologize for any statements that could be interpreted as inappropriate for the Huell Howser article talk page. Thanks. Cmguy777 (talk) 05:02, 22 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Cmguy. Please try not to take things so personally on Wikipedia.  They rarely are.  At the same time, if I said anything offensive, it was out of frustration at the circles the discussions were going in, and I'm sorry for that.  --Drmargi (talk) 16:44, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

"Restaurant Impossible" section
In the "Restaurant Impossible" section, have now put title of episode in the summary section. Do not know why "Food Network" made this change. Next week's episode is tilted "Creepy in Clearwater".Harryjunior1000 (talk) 13:32, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The restaurant name that chef Irvine is going on April 28th is called "Smitty's"Harryjunior1000 (talk) 13:56, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The episode titles are irrelevant; they're there to attract attention and don't have the same importance they do in scripted drama. I've no idea why Food Network started using them, and I'm not really sure it matters.  In the article, we add what has encyclopedic value, and that's the restaurant name.  --Drmargi (talk) 16:48, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Future episodes May 12th "Mom and Dad's Italian Restaurant" DeFuniak Springs, Florida May 19th "Wagon Wheel Family Restaurant" No town mentioned May 26th "Bryan's Smokehouse" Lufkin, Texas June 9th don't know name of place only episode title name "Lost In the Woods" June 16th only have episode title "Sink or Swim' June 23rd again only have episode title "It's All Greek To Me" Thanks for your interest and input.Harryjunior1000 (talk) 14:55, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Esquire logo
I'm not trying to get in an edit war, but I removed the Esquire Logo on the G4 article and some one has added it back. Someone left a note on my talk page,which you can read, and also someone else in the edit history of the G4 channel stated they didn't give a whit about the source and changed it back. Also I was not logged in when I took out the Esquire Logo again. My question is this,how can a logo be put in a article when I don't think there is even a launch date set for the Esquire network? From what I read online, the launch date for Esquire keeps getting delayed. I don't edit much stuff to do with tv so that is why I am asking you. I don't want to get in trouble.thanks for any info.--BeckiGreen (talk) 23:52, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The various editors need a reliable source that the logo on the web page is the logo the network will use. At present, that doesn't exist; they're assuming the Esquire logo will be used for the network.  You've got a valid case, and I commented on the talk page, that the logo is still speculative, particularly given that it's labeled as the probable logo.  Moreover once a discussion is opened, reverts should stop.  --Drmargi (talk) 00:08, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

List of Person of Interest characters
At the bottom of the POI Wikia page it says that content is available under CC-BY-SA, so there is no copyvio and they shouldn't be upset if material is reused verbatim. I'm almost finished cleaning the article up to my own liking, but it could use still use considerable revision. -Regards Nv8200p talk 19:18, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Not according to the copyvio expert around here: I had it checked out before I raised the issue with the editor. The license isn't freedom to copy; there are issues with attribution that have to be addressed and the editor refuses to do so.  Little of it's worth keeping anyway.  The article's writing is garbage, between the factual errors, speculation, adolescent writing, European English, fancruft and spam (the wiki has a nut-job spammer they should ban, but haven't.)  --Drmargi (talk) 19:29, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Top Gear themes
Hey there. Just wanted to let you know that the edits I made to add the "themes" to some episodes are the themes they say they have on the respective episode themselves. I am not really sure how to "source" something about an episode that is in the episode itself, but it is certainly not POV or OR. So I would very much like you to revert your revert.

Kindly, some IP address. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.220.66.145 (talk) 00:21, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


 * It's trivial, not used regularly and adds nothing to the article. How's that?  --Drmargi (talk) 22:15, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Amy's Baking Company
Hiya! I endorsed the PROD on the article for Amy's Baking Company, but I'm leaning heavily towards taking this to AfD. I think that this is pretty much WP:ONEEVENT in a nutshell, but there has been quite a bit of coverage about it. It's the type of thing that I believe will get deleted in the long run because there's no depth of coverage, but I might run it through AfD just to ensure that it gets a full fair shake and to ensure that it does fall under the "one event" category. I also think that this might also be a better course, since this would also keep people from recreating it for the most part if they were to try to make another entry. I also have a feeling that this would end up getting dePRODed anyway- it's still in the news ATM and I thought I'd give you a head's up so that if you see it's at AfD, you'll know why. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:21, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I ultimately decided to take it to AfD. There's just this small smidgen of doubt that makes me think that this could maybe, MAYBE squeak by notability guidelines. I doubt it, but I just feel that this is probably the best venue for deletion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)


 * That's fine. I don't see the point of the article, but if others do and are willing to make it work, more power to them.  The coverage seems to be largely local, and largely limited to the baloney the owners pulled on various social media over the weekend, thus my 15 minutes metaphor.  But at the same time, I didn't see a speedy deletion category that quite fit.  This is my first one of these, so I'm just happy if I did it correctly!  --Drmargi (talk) 11:49, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013
Hello Drmargi. I was just curious about something. You never told me about when the major rewrite of the Harold Finch article is going to be done, and that is the only thing I'm concerned about. I'm not trying to be critical or anything. I can assure you. The things I caused with the Person of Interest Wikia will never happen again (literally for real). From now on, I'll stop copy and pasting words from other Wikia websites, as well as violating copyrights. If you know the date of when it is going to be finished, please let me know. Batman194 (talk) 21:03, 16 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I will. I have a full time job and not much time to work on it at the moment, but it will get done.  --Drmargi (talk) 08:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * But can you tell me the possible date? Batman194 (talk) 17:14, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * No. As I said, I have a full-time job, and I edit when I have time.  That article has to be completely rewritten, especially now someone tried to WP:PROD it, and that takes time.  --Drmargi (talk) 17:46, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, I see. Alright. Batman194 (talk) 19:52, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm curious as to why my edit was reverted on 2012-13 TV Schedule. If you checked the sources, all of them were true... and included in next year's primetime. Just check. --Rzhm (talk) 22:50, 16 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I reverted one by Robert Moore because it was sourced to a wiki. Is that you?  Check the edit summary; I explained why there.  --Drmargi (talk) 23:17, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposed article split
An IP has proposed that Richard Castle be split. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 13:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I see that. All that's going to create is a speedy delete of the novel article.  On its own, notability will be a very tough sell.  --Drmargi (talk) 15:24, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Person of Interest (TV series)
I forgot to correct the "undo" to restate it more clearly. I'm trying to come up with a way to indicate that Shaw is moving from an occasional character to (reportedly) a full-time or main character. Meanwhile, I also corrected some poorly-written stuff an IP wrote. (Also uncited, so it might be deleteable, but that's another story). So it wasn't really an "undo", it was a rewording. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:39, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, I wonder if the actors playing either Carter or Fusco are leaving the show. The writers have really painted them into a corner, Fusco especially. So I wonder if Shaw becomes the fifth main character, or if a main character drops out. P.S. I like the show, which is very well-written, meaning I can't necessarily guess what's coming or what someone's going to say before they say it. However, I don't keep up on the fan trivia. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:42, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * But you did still undo it, for the third time; I was about to tag you for disruptive editing. The problem, Bugs, is that casting info doesn't go in a character description. Take it over to the S3 section of the episodes article; that's where it belongs. --Drmargi (talk) 16:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)  (ETA: Never mind; I moved it to Production and reworded it so the distinction between cast and character is clear. --Drmargi (talk) 16:55, 20 May 2013 (UTC))
 * Then you need to weed out other, similar references in those lists. Like where someone says such-and-such happens to so-and-so in this-or-that episode. Meanwhile, I'm taking that page off my watch list, so I won't incur your wrath any further. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:36, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, good lord, what are you, 12? What wrath?  Honestly, I despair of editors being able to take any sort of criticism these days.  There's a difference between cast and character, and you got them muddled.  You had perfectly good information, but put it in the wrong place.  You could have started a discussion when I first reverted, and we'd have worked it out just fine.  As it is, I sorted it out, and the edit is still there with a minor change of language.  No big deal.  If you want to turn that into some sort of wrath, be my guest, but you're miles wide of the mark.  --Drmargi (talk) 22:52, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * This is the second time in recent months that you've exercised ownership of that page, so I'm conceding that ownership, because it's not important enough to me to fight an edit war over. But you had best take a softer approach in the future, or someone less patient than I might take you places you don't want to be. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:22, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Nonsense. Ownership easy to fling around and hard to prove, generally used by someone pouting because they didn't get their way.  You chose to make it contentious when you ignored WP:BRD.  Get your own house clean before you start pointing the finger at others'.  --Drmargi (talk) 01:49, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Nonsense. You own it. Use it in good health. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:07, 21 May 2013 (UTC)


 * There's no indication any actors are leaving; new casting usually just means story expansion. I think they're adding Shaw to back-stop Reese while they get Carter out of trouble, then to keep an eye on the Project and the relevant list side of things.  Carter's not in an impossible corner, but it will take a while to get her out of it, and I'm intrigued how Elias will fit into the story.  --Drmargi (talk) 16:55, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

You've got email
Hi DM. Just wanted to let ya know that I finally had time to type my email about POI and sent it to you this morning. Enjoy the last two episodes of the second season tonight! MarnetteD | Talk 16:02, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * We got the big season ending episode tonight! I hope that you are well and that you get to enjoy it. MarnetteD | Talk 15:46, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Haven't forgotten you! It's been a wild couple weeks, and I keep trying to find a nice block of time to sit down and chat electronically.  Manana, I hope!  Can't wait for the season finale tonight.  --Drmargi (talk) 15:53, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * That was quite thrilling. As opposed to last years cliffhanger which set up four months of anxiety worrying about what happen to Finch and the machine this one gave me a fun sense of anticipation for what they will do next year. Have a great weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 16:12, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I've got to watch it again, especially the ending, to figure out just what transpired. Did you notice the patient and orderlies in the scene in the hospital were Nolan, Plageman and the director?  Good weekend yourself! --Drmargi (talk) 16:32, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Well it is a big night! I'm gonna do the 7 episode marathon through the OnDemand menu so I can fast forward thru commercials in anticipation of the big season final then it is a mere 6 months to the big anniversary celebration. Have your read that there are plans to air the special in movie theaters at the same time that it is broadcast? If that does happen it would save us having to wait until that night for the BBC America broadcast. Cheers and have a fun Whovian Day. MarnetteD | Talk 14:46, 18 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Back atcha! You just gave me the idea to do the marathon.  Let's see what's on my OnDemand! (LOTS, as it turns out!) I did read about the special being in 3D and in movie theaters.  Not to be missed! Enjoy, enjoy, and let's debrief afterward!  --Drmargi (talk) 18:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Just incredible - it may take a repeated viewing or two and several days to absorb it all. For a long time viewer like me the references to the earlier Doctors was a real treat. I may have missed it but I didn't see flashbacks of, or body doubles for, McGann or Tennant and Ecclestone leather jacket only went by in the rescue scene near the end. What a glorious setup for the anniversary special. The reveal of John Hurt's involvment leaves me wanting the next six months to pass by as quickly as possible. It was also nice to see an add for Broadchurch as I have already had that recommended to me by a couple people. Hope you have a Sunday fun day. MarnetteD | Talk 01:26, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Whoa, nelly! There will be many arguments over many pints trying to sort out that ending. And John Hurt -- did you know he was due to appear? If I saw anything about it, I'd forgotten so he was a nice surprise. I saw doubles for E and T in that final sequence, but no McG. They may not have rights to his image, since the film was done in collaboration with Fox, although that's hard to imagine. I missed #6 the first time 'round, but spotted him the second. I found the use of the colorized images and the historical nature of the episode SO clever. Have you read any reviews yet? --Drmargi (talk) 06:27, 19 May 2013 (UTC)


 * As far as I can tell they managed to keep Hurt's appearance a secret. I went freeze frame the second time I watched it and still didn't see T. The person who runs by after E looks to have the 4th Drs long scarf and hat but they are they wine colored ones of his last season. I could be wrong though. I'll check again when the DVDs arrive in a couple weeks. I had the same rights fees thought about McG but they have used his pictures in previous stories like The Next Doctor and The Eleventh Hour. It is possible that they couldn't find a good place to have Clara appear in the footage of his one TV appearance. I haven't seen any reviews. The idea of a person being split into many versions of themselves and then being strewn across time was a central feature of The City of Death but I have no problem with that plot device being used again. I get a feeling that this ep was a nod to 10th and 20th anniversary shows The Three Doctors and The Five Doctors because, from the little I've read, the 50th is not going to be a big reunion of past Drs and companions. I know I will be treasure having watched this ep for a long time. Well my Endeavour DVDs arrived Friday so my Sunday has some fun viewing ahead. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 16:33, 19 May 2013 (UTC)


 * There's a coat that flashes by at one point that appeared to be his, and you could hear his voice at another point. I understand McGann could be heard, but I couldn't make him out.  They pretty much emphasized the first seven.  I think you're right about the anniversary episodes; can you help me out with the Valeyard?  I know they were lawyers on Gallifrey who tried the Doctor, but that's about it.  Enjoy Endeavour! --Drmargi (talk) 07:45, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Good to know about their voices being used - those went by so fast that I am hoping that they show up in the subtitles on the DVD so I can get each one. The Valeyard is more than just a lawyer. He is a manifestation of the Doctor's dark side (from somewhere between the 12th and 13th and finale incarnations) who tries to have the Doctor executed to cover up the High Council of Time Lords involvement in the near destruction of Earth. He was played with delicious relish by Michael Jayston during the The Trial of a Time Lord season. One item to note "The Valeyard" seemed to be used only as his official title during that season but it has come to be used as his name in the years since. Hope to get ep 3 of E in today. As I stated onmy talk page the ending of Fugue is quite powerful. I can't wait (but I will just have to :-)) to hear your reaction to it. At the end of each episode they use the music cue (as they did in the pilot) of going to the Morse (code) music from the original series and it does choke me up a little every time I hear it. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 16:25, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

White Collar - Thanks
Thanks for taking care of today's vandalism to List of White Collar episodes. You beat me to it this time. I'm not watching many articles lately but this one sure seems to be a big target for someone. Gmporr (talk) 18:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)


 * no problem. This date thing is an endless problem. --Drmargi (talk) 18:48, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

ANi
I wasn't disagreeing with you, I know only about the legal threat. I'm sure that this thread will solve the problems whoever is at fault. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:35, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Cool. I will confess, it was a head-scratcher response, but I see where you're coming from.. Thanks for the clarification. --Drmargi (talk) 14:38, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Amy's Baking Company (Kitchen Nightmares) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Amy's Baking Company (Kitchen Nightmares) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Amy's Baking Company (Kitchen Nightmares) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. &#61;TIMMYC&#61; (talk) 17:32, 30 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I've already commented; I was planning to nominate the article myself, since it's got some major problems, but am much happier to see a neutral second editor do it instead. --Drmargi (talk) 17:37, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

covert affairs and the "idea" of david bowie songs?
Hello Drmargi,

would this be a creditable source for the "idea" that people are the season 3 titles are similar to various david bowie songs? http://www.tvfanatic.com/2012/11/covert-affairs-review-easy-target/ 173.206.72.186 (talk) 17:24, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

The big news
I know that you will already have seen the news about Matt. He may be a tougher act to follow than David was. The first article that I saw a "rumored to take over" edit was the one for Damien Lewis. Not a shred of evidence of course but I had to chuckle as the "wish to be a ginger" would finally be fulfilled :-)

DVDs got here and I found the body double for McGann. He runs right in front of Clara at the 1m 9s mark just after we see the 3rd Dr in Bessie and just before the 2nd goes running through a park. This sequence is repeated at the 35m 40s mark. Tennant shows up at the 35m 29s mark. He is in the lower right as Clara looks out on a futuristic city skyline. I think it is from either "The Forest of the Dead" or "Silence in the Library."

I think I will have to chose a favorite story from each season and watch it again to fill the months leading up to November. I wonder if they might show An Adventure in Time and Space and the 50th Anniversary special together on the 23rd?

I hope that the school year is winding down successfully for you and best wishes for the summer ahead. MarnetteD | Talk 04:59, 3 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm still trying to get my head around it all. A couple weeks and work is over for the summer.  Hallelujah.  I still work, but in a much different way.


 * Body double is just where I thought he was. They all move through at a blink and you'll miss it pace. I didn't notice the skyline; must look again!


 * More soon. Bear with me...  --Drmargi (talk) 06:25, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Person of Interest (TV series)
Hi, a brief edit summary here would have been helpful to other editors. Thanks. Taroaldo <font color="Red"> ✉   09:03, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Things to look for
Hello DM. I know I mentioned this series some time ago but I wanted to let you know that the second season was even better than the first. In fact episode two was particularly good and contains a performance by Dominique Pinon that is among the most emotional that I have seen. The DVDs were released a few weeks ago so you might check and see if Netflix is carrying them. Well I am sure that you are set for Lewis this weekend on Masterpiece Mystery so I will just say enjoy and have a great weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 20:12, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi again. I just came across this List of Agatha Christie's Poirot episodes bit of good news. Who knows how long it will be before we get to see the episodes. I especially look forward to the one where Hastings, Japp and Miss Lemon return. I always liked Pauline Moran's take on ML. Many years ago A&E (when they had programs worth watching - oof that was a long time ago now) aired this program a few times. It was a fanciful tale of Hercule complaining to Agatha about how she had bumped him off in Curtain. I still have it on a VHS somewhere. Hmmm do I still know how to operated my tape player? Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 00:00, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Looks like it is available in sections on YouTube if you are interested. MarnetteD | Talk 00:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * A chum and I were just talking tonight about how we miss Poirot and Miss Marple. Mystery! is great for the Morse clones, but where are these two and Jason Isaac's show?  As for running a VCR, it's like riding a bicycle.  That show sounds like such fun.  David Suchet's tweets during final production have been lovely.  He's getting very sentimental about saying a final goodbye to the role.  A reunion with the old team would be marvelous! --Drmargi (talk) 08:31, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

VisualEditor
Hey Drmargi :). Thanks for testing out the VisualEditor! I note that the first change in this edit has some nowiki tags around it, and I'm trying to work out what our software is doing wrong :). Did you type out the square brackets, by any chance? Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:59, 26 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I did. That works when I edit using the visual editor on Wikia, so I assumed it would work here.  I'm still finding my way around the VE, but it looks good so far, other than making tables rather hard to edit.  I have trouble getting the cursor into individual cells. --Drmargi (talk) 22:02, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, we're working on tables - and on making it handle people submitting markup. Thanks for the speedy response! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:52, 27 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm happy to help if I can; shall drop a message on your talk page if anything else pops up? Speaking of which, I like the addition (or did I just discover it?) of the edit|edit source feature for section editing.  --Drmargi (talk) 12:50, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that works fine! And yep, just deployed last night; rather nice to have around, I think :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:06, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Copper episodes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Five Points (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

All the best
I wanted to stop by and wish you and yours a fun and safe 4th. Just think when it is done it will only be a few days until Jeremy, James and Richard present us with new episodes. I was watching an older episode and they mentioned that their eps (not counting the Xmas special) were 60+ minutes long. That means yet another Beeb program that is cut down for our viewing :-( Have a great weekend as well! MarnetteD | Talk 22:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I've been a lousy correspondent recently! Are you ready for Endeavour?  I sure am!  We've had a Marple marathon all afternoon, so I've been in St. Mary Mead.  Too hot for a nice cup of tea, or I'd have made one.  And I am SO ready for Top Gear -- have you see the first Stars in the Car?  BTW, do you watch the US version?  It's not bad.  Not the same, but not bad if you take it on its own merits.  --Drmargi (talk) 01:47, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * No I haven't seen the US version. I will be on the lookout for it. The ending of the episode of Endeavour that finishes on the rooftop of one of Oxford's buildings is very special. I think it come up next Sunday though my memory could be faulty on this. I hope that you have a wonderful week. MarnetteD | Talk 17:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Forgot to ask which Miss Marple. Joan, Geraldine of Julia? Or all three? While I like the last two Joan will always be MM for me. Her performance was special. And her series had the best theme music as well :-) I just noticed that the Top Gear crew is in New Zealand tonight! I do love seeing that country. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 21:17, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry -- Geraldine. They were fun to see again.  They also showed The 39 Steps, but left the second audio track on, which was uber-annoying; it must have bugged a lot of others, because they re-ran it last night.  "The Newsroom" marathon today; I just turned HBO back on so I can watch the second season.  I adore Sorkin.  Meanwhile, the marathon today is Edwin Drood, which I'm looking forward to watching since seeing "The Americans".  --Drmargi (talk) 14:56, 14 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I had done the OnDemand marathon of The Newsroom leading up to last Sunday's 2nd season start as well. As much as I enjoyed him as Jack McCoy it sure is good to see Sam Waterston in a different role. I have been a fan of his ever since I saw this version of Much Ado... and the Kate Hepburn version of The Glass Menagerie. The fact that L&O's first DA, Michael Moriarty, is in the latter as well is a treat. Thank goodness that both plays have come out on DVD so I can watch them again whenever I get the urge. MarnetteD | Talk 17:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * The new season looks great!! Charlie is so not Jack, and that's what's fun. On the DVD, he talks about the freedom of the role after years of playing Jack.  It was no criticism of L&O, just different.  I'm excited about next week!  --Drmargi (talk) 18:03, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Cast Listings
There is nothing in TOOSOON that speakings about cast listings for television programs. In addition, promotions to the main cast are historically added during the off season of a program (see Scandal (TV series) or How I Met Your Mother for current examples). — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhoIsWillo (talk • contribs) 04:10, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Are you aware that once your edit is reverted, you don't keep restoring it, but rather start a discussion? I used the wrong link; it should have been WP:CRYSTAL.  The standard practice is to add new season characters when they start; until then, their upcoming status goes in the production section.  Once your edit is reverted, it's up to you to discuss and reach consensus to restore the edit, not edit war to force it in.  --Drmargi (talk) 06:12, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * That doesn't seem to be the case, as evidenced by the two other major cast promotions listed above. In addition, WP:CRYSTAL states that it should not be included unless it is notable and almost certain to take place. In this case, it is both notable (as it is the first major cast change for one of the top rated programs on television) and has been confirmed by the producers of the show and reported in major entertainment news outlets. I apologize if I went about it the wrong way, but the information is verified, relevant and accurate. There's not much of an argument for failing to include it. WhoIsWillo (talk) 06:39, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The pages you refer to are heavily edited by younger editors who treat them as fan pages; consequently, there are frequent policy violations. The content will be removed, and the examples do nothing to support your case.  Moreover, Wikipedia works on consensus, not on the basis of who shouts loudest or pronouncements such as yours above, and discussions toward consensus take place on the article's talk page, somewhere you refuse to go.  As I noted on your talk page, your approach will have one outcome: it will get you blocked.  You're an inexperienced editor, and it would serve you well to learn the basic editorial policies soon, and to avoid trying to force edits anywhere, but particularly on an article where you don't ordinarily edit.  --Drmargi (talk) 16:33, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Point me to the policy and I will happily oblige. There is no policy that says what you are claiming, and the two policies you are pointing to do not say what you claim. WhoIsWillo (talk) 20:41, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * See WP:BRD. The community expects you to abide by it, which you have failed to do; once I reverted, you should have opened a discussion, not reverted twice more.  --Drmargi (talk) 23:57, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Kevin Chapman
I saw the first teaser for the next season of PoI last weekend and KC/Fusco was notable by his absence. He wasn't in the last couple eps of last season either so I am wondering if he is leaving or his role has been reduced. I know you keep up on these things where I don't so any info you have will be appreciated. Cheers and enjoy the rest of your week. MarnetteD | Talk 17:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey, you! Gee, I hope not.  Nothing in the last episodes suggested that, and they're usually good about putting those things in place.  He's going to be key to saving Carter's bacon, I would imagine.  My theory is either they didn't have a good clip of him, or he took a few episodes off.  I suspect they used the 23rd episode in their S2 order to film the S3 opener (ER used to do that) and he might still have been gone doing whatever he was doing.  I'll see what I can dig up.  Meanwhile, I'll have to look for the promo on YouTube.  When did you see it?  --Drmargi (talk) 17:24, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi again. It was Sat or Sun - maybe during the golf or 60 Min. It had John and Michael and Tariji all in character talking about what they did and why and then it gave the date of the series return. I tried finding the promo on the CBS website but couldn't locate it. My search skills are so poor compared to yours so I'll keep my fingers crossed that you locate it. MarnetteD | Talk 17:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Great minds think alike... I couldn't find it either.  I'd imagine it was done while they were filming the final two.  Bet they let him go for a movie role; I found two in post on the IMDB.  I haven't watched Tuesday's rerun of Trojan Horse.  Hopefully it will run then.  They're only a few days into production.  The writers are tweeting pictures from the set; I can assure you Bear is there!  --Drmargi (talk) 18:01, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Looks like he is in this poster that they are featuring at the teams appearance at Comic Con so all is well. I do wonder if Fusco's son will ever be mentioned again. Carter's has shown up in a storyline or two but F's hasn't been mentioned since his appearance in season 1. On another note it seem that Comic Con just gets bigger and bigger. Must be a fun time. Unfortunately I have reached the age where I just don't deal with crowds that big anymore. If you ever get a hold of the Special Edition DVD of The Five Doctors they have an extra about all the festivities that went on in 1983. Included is a segment about the convention in Chicago that took place on Thanksgiving weekend. Towards the end of the section we see a room where Lis, Jon and Pat are talking to a roomful of fans. I am off camera to the right! It is a trip to be talking to fans today who weren't even born then.


 * On another note I don't know why everyone is shocked by the stuff Snowden has revealed. PoI watchers like us know that has been going on for years and it was part of the story arc over the last few eps of the first season of The Newsroom. Did you know that if you ask Siri a question and she doesn't reply it might be because she is on a date with PRISM. HeeHee. MarnetteD | Talk 18:07, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

News from Comic Con! KC was there (Taraji Hensen wasn't) and there was big discussion of Fusco returning to his old "heroic" self. They also announced Amy Acker will be a regular; I'm not keen on that at all. Root is fine in small doses, but how does she fit in as a regular? I'm struggling with how they'll use Shaw every week, but at least she fits the formula. Did you see the preview video? I'll have to go find the link again. The poster is a HOOT! --Drmargi (talk) 16:36, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the update from CC. I mentioned last fall that I was worried that they were turning F into comic relief so I agree wholeheartedly with a move away from that. I also agree with your assessment of Root. I enjoy The Paternoster Gang a bunch and have thought they are ready for their own show. Then I stop myself because a weekly series would likely drain the magic and fun from their characters. When I was doing the first season marathon of The Newsroom I noticed that a Katie Saunders was in charge of wardrobe. Having been a friend of a KS who worked on the Perry Mason films (most of which were filmed in Colorado) back in the 80s I had to check her IMDb page and, lo and behold, it is her! We haven't connected in years but it is still nice to know someone who is adding to the making that series special. MarnetteD | Talk 17:40, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * You might get a chuckle from part of Lugnuts post here Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 21:18, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, that's funny! Here's the link for the POI preview video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KoElIeOJcM&feature=player_embedded.  --Drmargi (talk) 22:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Great stuff. Thanks for providing the link. Argh gotta wait 60 days - thank goodness we have The Newsroom and Mystery! to fill our time til then. I didn't realize they were moving to Tuesdays. I hope that was for positive reasons. Thanks again. MarnetteD | Talk 23:38, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Isn't it fun? I'm so wrapped up in Major Crimes, our shows and several other summer shows, I'm happily able to wait.  Oh, and they mentioned that Zoe will be back.  Excellent!  I love a good, adult relationship like that; not silly shippy nonsense.  BTW, where do you think the closet Carter was looking at is?  (What grammar!!) --Drmargi (talk) 23:58, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I am glad you are wrapped up, in rather than committing, MC's :-) The promo was such a mix of scenes that we have seen with those of the upcoming season that I couldn't remember which was which in every case. At a guess it might be a closet in Cal Beecher's home other wise it might be someone tracking HR that we haven't met yet. I may have to wait on the DVDs for season 2 until Amazon has a sale like they did on season 1 last year so you may get a chance to catch up on things before I do. Don't forget that Broadchurch starts in a couple weeks on BBCA. Redrose64 recommended it highly. Enjoy your week. MarnetteD | Talk 01:17, 22 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi again. I don't know if you've ever encountered WP:BJAODN in your travels. There is lots of fun stuff there and this More Best of BJAODN is one of my faves. MarnetteD | Talk 15:21, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Broadchurch and a new season of L&O:UK the same day! Hot dawg. I can't wait for them to start. I haven't seen the essay you cited. I'll give it a read. --Drmargi (talk) 18:10, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

King & Maxwell
Rather than just removing the information on guest stars for this show, can you place this information on the show page in a more acceptable way? When I have seen guest star information posted for other TV shows, it has been placed on Season pages. But since, as far as I know, this show has not been renewed (yet), Season pages have not been created. And the casting has sources/citations so that can't be the issue (plus the episodes have already aired) so it's not a matter of being "in production."

Is there are a reason why guest cast members can't be listed on the primary TV show page until the day when/if Season pages are created? It's casting information that typically has been listed for other TV shows on Wikipedia. Newjerseyliz (talk) 14:23, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * As a rule, guest stars aren't discussed in the main article because they don't appear over the life of the show. The main article is about the whole show, not a given episode in which they appear  Also, over time, there are simply too many of them, and notability of some versus others is hard to establish.  It might not seem that way now because the show is new and there are only two you want to add, but after a season, it's much more of a problem.  If King & Maxwell lasts to the point seasonal articles are in order, you can add them back then.  BTW, recurring cast make multiple appearances before they are listed (at least three).  --Drmargi (talk) 17:52, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Moriarty a recurring character?
Hello. Natalie Dormer appears in Risk Management, The Woman and Heroine - doesn't three episodes count as being a recurring character? (I've also previously started a discussion for this on the talk page - not sure where the best place to discuss it would be). --Bluebellanon (talk) 15:26, 31 July 2013 (UTC) Just realised I forgot to say that Ato Essandoh also only appears innews doesn't effe three episodes and he's mentioned. So I assumed the same would apply. --Bluebellanon (talk) 16:02, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Ato Essandoh makes periodic appearances as Sherlock's sponsor and can be expected to appear again given it's an open-ended role; that's a recurring character.  Natalie Dormer appeared very briefly in Risk Management, then in the season finale in a story arc.  That's not a recurring role.  Recurring characters appear periodically over time, not in a story arc.  Numbers of appearances alone don't determine whether a character is recurring.  Any further should be discussed on the show's talk page.  --Drmargi (talk) 16:20, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I hope this news isn't for your area
I just read that Time Warner has dropped CBS in southern California. I sure hope that doesn't mess up your viewing habits. In the olden days of last century I could overnight you VHS tapes of your favorite shows. If they are your cable provider hopefully things will get worked out before the new season of PoI etc get going. Enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 18:53, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, they did. It apparently just happened; they dropped it in LA proper several days ago, and apparently us in the last 48 hours or so.  Instead, we have a big splash screen with a "poor little consumer and Time Warner" message; you can pretty much imagine what it says.  I doesn't seem to have had much effect, KCBS, KCAL (a local station that CBS owns) and one or two minor channels are all that seem to be gone.  The only thing I watch on CBS right now is POI reruns, and I have the torrents on my iPad, so I'm covered.  I don't get Showtimes, but can access Showtime On Demand via my iPad, and it was still working last I looked.  It wouldn't matter much if I did; I just use it to watch Ray Donovan, and am struggling through it.  --Drmargi (talk) 19:24, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Liberty!, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stephen Lang (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Cutthroat Kitchen
I had source to show that was the plot I just rewrote it per Wikipedia rules. The epsiodes came off the official website for the show and I click on each episode and looked at the air date then placed then in order and that is how I got the episode order,and not sure about why they are number the way they are but I will try to confirm episode order. Sorry about copyvio material as I did try to rewrite the source info and also for the over sourcing just wanted to make sure nobody would complain about there not being alot of sources. Casey.Grim85 (talk) 02:15, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It takes practice to rewrite source material. I've got it pretty much down to basics now, so you can run with it from there.  As for the episode dates, it's entirely possible they rearranged them.  It happens.  Holler if you need help! --Drmargi (talk) 06:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

List of Top Gear episodes
I was wondering if you could have a look at List of Top Gear episodes now that some changes have been made. It really only affects Series' 1 and 2 as that's all I've had a chance to change at this time. A lot of IPs have commented but most comments are impossible to follow up. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 08:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It looks much better, and you've found a happy medium. I still don't see the point of having a title column given the vast majority are just season/episode numbers; why not change it to episode, and use a number, then if a title is needed, it can be added instead? --Drmargi (talk) 16:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I did say on the talk page that the title column is redundant but there was opposition. At the moment I'm just trying to make all the IPs happy. Once that's done, there are other issues such as this that can be addressed. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 23:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I missed it. I finally gave up on the discussion when the IP's and organization got too chaotic.  When one particular edit warrior showed up, that finished me.  Too bad about that; the episode number isn't the title.  I'll go back and try to read the discussion again.  But well done on the rest!!  You're made of sterner stuff than I am.  --Drmargi (talk) 23:48, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Food Network (Season 9) Show Name
While there is no official name yet, Eat, Date, Love was the name of her pilot episode. If you take a look at Season 8, Justin's show name Rebel with a Culinary Cause was listed as the show name because that was what was pitched. His show is now called Rebel Eats. I think it's appropriate to put the pitch title to follow how the previous season did it. Also while not confirmed, this link: http://tvline.com/2013/08/12/damaris-phillips-food-network-star-winner-paula-deen-southern-food/ still talks about how at the moment it was called Eat, Date, Love. I'm just trying to keep with the consistency of previous seasons. It can be changed should the show name change but for now it should go with the original name. Revan46 01:29, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

A couple items to be aware of
Hi DM. Just saw this documentary airing on HBO this month and thought you might be interested. Also I am reading Joe Muto's book and it makes a nice compare and contrast with watching new episodes of The Newsroom. Well I know your summer is winding down so I hope you get to enjoy the rest of it. MarnetteD | Talk 21:28, 14 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry! I totally overlooked this.  I'll check out the book and the article!  Enjoy your summer, too! --Drmargi (talk) 21:32, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Changes
why you delete my changes even they being supported by sites on the internet? Vhmadeira (talk) 02:20, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * #1 because the IMDB is not a reliable source, as well established on WIkipedia, #2 because there was a formatting mess, #3 because the update to the season table is far, far too early and #4 because we don't use hidden notes to indicate summer finale and winter premiere dates. Most of this was explained in the edit summaries.  --Drmargi (talk) 02:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013
Hi Drmargi. How was your major rewrite on the Harold Finch (Person of Interest) article going? Batman194 (talk) 19:08, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Never mind that because I know that you are probably busy at your job. I have come to ask you a request. Remember what you said resisting the urge to make any changes until you tell me the major rewrite on the Harold Finch article is done? I just need to do one edit. Pretty sure I need your permission to do that of course. Is that okay with you? Batman194 (talk) 22:57, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know if you are going to respond, but please read my message as soon as possible. Batman194 (talk) 04:12, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

FYI
You may already be aware of this but just in case the Great Performances program on PBS is going to feature The Hollow Crown starting sept 20th. A couple of our UK wikipedians recommended it a few months ago. I did enjoy it (with a couple small quibbles) so you might want to add it to your busy list. I am now hooked on Masterchef UK Professionals. The 2012 contest was such fun to watch. It even got me to tear up when the 3 contestants were being praised by the group of Michelin star chefs that they had prepared a meal for and again at the end when the final two shared the victory. One other item - I went looking for a link that I had given you in a past message and I found that the way the bot is archiving your talk page threads is a little odd. Instead of creating a new archive every so often to keep things in chrono order (2010 in archive one - 2011 in archive two - etc) it is sending threads to only three archives. The upshot is that each archive has a mishmash of dates. For example Archive One might have June 2010, Sept 2010 and then Jan 2011. Then Two might have July 2010, Oct 2010 and Feb 2011. Now it is not a big deal and I found what I was looking for. Also, it would probably be a hassle fixing it but I thought I'd let ya know in case you are ever looking for an old thread and you were wondering what it going on. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 01:23, 13 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, I am so ready for that. I've been awaiting it since the Shakespeare specials ran last year.  I do with they'd do more of them as well!  I can't get interested in Masterchef UK Prof.  It's on in the morning when I'm getting ready for work, but is always a bit ho-hum.  A friend did my archives, so I'll have to let him know what's up.  I'm clueless!  Thanks for the heads up, though!


 * Ready for the last Newsroom? --Drmargi (talk) 23:59, 15 September 2013 (UTC)


 * (Newsroom note above) I was afraid that the cooking show might be to early for ya. Actually, I have to DVR it and watch it later in the morning. One of the things that has grabbed me is the passion with which the best chefs take on their challenges. It needs to be said that I have been like that for years though. Babette's Feast and Like Water for Chocolate got me in that mode years ago. Enjoy your week. MarnetteD | Talk 03:19, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Naughty Aaron
Hello DM. Well The Newsroom sure is ending with a bang. Wasn't it fun that WikiP got a mention tonight. I know it was based on a couple incidents from our recent past but I thought it was a shame that they didn't explain how easy it would have been to fix Maggie's article and that we don't have page administrators. All they needed was a WP:RS showing her time at Cambridge. Why don't you ease Neal's workload by doing the entry for him - heehee. I hope that you are well and that you have a wonderful autumn. MarnetteD | Talk 03:26, 9 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey, I was just thinking I'd neglected you! I'm trying to finish a project in the next two weeks, and am chained to my computer.  Ugh!!
 * Aaron is killing me. Will is going to put a lip-lock on Mac any minute now, you watch!  And how much do I love Charlie and Sloan, and Don?  I had to laugh at the WP stuff; that sort of thing does happen all the time, and makes the site look pretty absurd, I must say.  I find policy, particularly RS and a couple others tend to run away with things at time, and we end up with the most ridiculous errors as a result.  I did catch the page administrator error, which was odd coming from Neal, but he may not work on WP recreationally, so I can also see how an editor like him might perceive an admin as a page admin.  A lovely autumn back atcha.  At least you have proper autumnal weather where you are!  --Drmargi (talk) 07:06, 9 September 2013 (UTC)


 * My take on it was that Aaron wrote about WikiP based on the bad press that we've had without investigating how things really work here, thus the errors. But that is just WP:SYNTH on my part :-) The episode "Red Team III" was one of those that was so good I had to rewatch it a couple times just to revel in its intelligent script and wonderful performances. In Broadchurch Pauline Quirke is playing the wonderful creepy, caravan living Susan. She was even creepier in The Sculptress. It was one of several TV adaptations of the works of Minette Walters that were produced in the 90s. Hang in there!! MarnetteD | Talk 01:32, 10 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I just laughed like a drain when I heard that. I'm an academic, but also have a background in journalism, and I know that verifiability is not a guarantee of either accuracy or truth.  Despite the admin comment, I could just see that article and the exchange that would take place -- I seem to recall something more or less like that popping up with a reporter trying to correct details in her article some months back.  It's ludicrous that they won't allow the subject to make routine changes like that.  And as you say, all they have to do is go to the Cambridge Union's resources and viola!  A reliable source.  Red Team III was excellent, as was A Step Too Many.  I loved the scenes between Don and Sloan in the dark office.  I just love those characters.  And OH do I remember Pauline Quirke in The Sculptress.  Scaaaaary!  My goodness, but she's lost a lot of weight.  Good on her!  Did you see the character's dog is actually her own?  Lovely dog.  OK, must hit the sack.  Another busy day tomorrow.  Best to you!  --Drmargi (talk) 06:54, 10 September 2013 (UTC)


 * The last ep is wonderful. You got both the liplocks that you were hoping for! Now my only worry is it felt like they did one of those "We've wrapped up the most important story lines in case we don't get renewed" episodes. It is usually dodgt when HBO cuts back on the number of episodes it okays. The way Treme is getting cut short is a prime example. Oh well it was still a delight. Only quibble is they showed Colorado as undecided but it had gone blue by the time of night that the episode ended. Now its on to the new ep of Foyle's War. MarnetteD | Talk 03:12, 16 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I loved the last episode. They did tie up a  lot of lose threads, yes, but there's more to do.  They left plenty of story, not the least of which being the lawsuit, to do another season.  The third season is in Leona's line from Part I:  "GET IT BACK!" How do they get the confidence of the viewers back?  The trouble is, Sorkin hasn't agreed on scheduling a third season as yet.  Everyone else says it's a go.  --Drmargi (talk) 01:12, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

You have probably seen the good new already
That the anniversary special is going to be simulcast to avoid spoilers outside the UK. Woot Woot! I am hoping that will mean no commercial breaks as well. That'll be midday for us but it is on a Saturday so hopefully your work won't prevent you from seeing it. Now if we can just get them to do the same with An Adventure in space and Time that would be wonderful. Probably too much to ask but if it is at least bradcast on the same day I will be happy. Have a great week. MarnetteD | Talk 00:01, 23 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Well within the next 48 hours we will get to resuem the intrigues of Finch and Reese and the Machine and we will learn the identity of the killer on Broadchurch. I hope that you get a chance to enjoy them! MarnetteD | Talk 15:42, 24 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Forgot a couple things. How wonderful was it that Jeff Daniels won the Emmy over some stiff competition and against all odds? I watched the last episode of The Half Brother last night. Here is the wikipedia page for the book The Half Brother. Now we have seen numerous films and TV shows where the story of the main characters life is told in flashback but this one really worked for me. There is some wonderful acting and I enjoyed seeing Norway. There whole series is being repeated starting next Monday wo I wanted to let you know about it in case you are interested and can fit it into your busy schedule. MarnetteD | Talk 20:26, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Merging cancelled series' episode lists back into their home articles
I asked this here, but should we merge the Copper episode list back into its main page? Take away the lede and the table would fit according to SizeRule guidelines. Not a big deal, just thought it would keep readers from the extra navigation. Thanks for your input. —  Wylie pedia  08:20, 24 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what's best. The episode article is short, but I think two season worth of episodes is too long for the main article.  I'm not much help, I'm afraid.  --Drmargi (talk) 20:57, 24 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I think, for now, I'll leave everything as is. I might add the Series Overview section at the main page. Thanks for your input. —  Wylie pedia  16:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)


 * That sounds like a good idea! Let me know if you'd like me to take a peek.  Bummed the show was cancelled; the writing the second season was vastly improved. --Drmargi (talk) 01:18, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Did you notice?
In tonights episode of Foyle's War at roughly the 39 minute mark there was a blue Police Box in the backgroound! It is always fun to see a Police Box being a Police Box. Speaking of which in the footage that remains from the very first episode of The Avengers there is also Police Box to be seen at one point. The episode was broadcast on 7 Jan 1961 so not only was it a Police Box being a Police Box it was a Police Box that couldn't be anything else!! It would be 35 months until our perceptions of that form would change forever :-) Enjoy the first week of October. MarnetteD | Talk 04:47, 30 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I didn't, but PBS+ will rerun it during the week and I'll watch out for it then. What interesting history, too.  What did you think of Foyle?  I thought he made the transition beautifully and really liked the first three.  Did you notice they used some of the same locations as Ripper Street? --Drmargi (talk) 05:39, 30 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with your assessment of FW. The only problem is that three episodes is not nearly enough. I want to have at least 4 more weeks worth of episodes to anticipate. I thought I was seeing some of the same locations but I wasn't sure. Maybe it was because there was a lot less horse dung on the streets in the mid 1900s. heehee. MarnetteD | Talk 15:13, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

BBC America wishlist
Since you take care of the article about 13-14 US TV schedule I am sure you've seen thatLucky 7 was canceled after two eps. Do you think we can beg BBCA to air The Syndicate (TV series) which it was derived from. The few clips I've seen look interesting and one of the actors from the first season is Neville Longbottom portrayer Matthew Lewis. While I am thinking wishfully I wish they would broadcast all of the UK DW tributes that are likely to air on Nov 23rd instead of another marathon of episodes. Sigh oh well. Have a grea week! MarnetteD | Talk 20:12, 6 October 2013 (UTC)