User talk:Whats new?/Archive 2

Disambiguation link notification for April 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ray Hadley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Media Watch. 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) 09:04, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Australia–Iran relations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Islamic State. 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) 09:04, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015 in Australian television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stan. 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) 09:57, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for updating the formatiing on the Restaurant Impossible page. I was using the beta Editor and wasn't sure how to add color and such. I am not very familiar with editing source code as well! Thanks. Hopefully, I can figure it out one day! Gameshows (talk) 07:07, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. It took me a little while to work it all out too, just keep having a look at other people's code and see if you can copy parts of it so you have a template or format to work with. Good luck! Whats new? (talk) 07:50, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015 in Australian television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Ark. 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) 09:21, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Interview for The Signpost
This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Sydney

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Sydney for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks,  Rcsprinter123    (comment)  @ 10:05, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

TV Tonight Referencing
Hello Whats New?,

Thank you very much for your message. I apologise for not replying sooner but I prefer to post talk messages while on a desktop and I have only had mobile access the last few days. Thank you very much for your guidance, that will definitely shorten the time it takes to reference. Especially given the amount I do reference TV Tonight given there is few other Australian television websites to source.

Thanks again and have a great weekend,

Forbesy 777 (talk) 06:11, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Terror in the Skies (2013 TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British. 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) 09:54, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James Bracey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ASTRA. 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) 10:20, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited High Flyers (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page EMEA. 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) 09:00, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of High Flyers (TV series)


The article High Flyers (TV series) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable TV show. No evidence of awards or in depth coverage in independent reliable sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:54, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015 in Australian television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A to Z. 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) 09:02, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Building the Brand
 * added links pointing to Winnebago, Jack Daniels, Rolls Royce and 3D

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Fear the Walking Dead
Your recent editing history at Fear the Walking Dead shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.


 * We clearly need a wider range of voices on this issue, so I won't change the article until more users have commented. I've added the article to WP:3 to help do that. Whats new? (talk) 12:51, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Project templates
Some people object to tagging your articles so you need to do it with care. You need to be careful not to overrate your own articles. Obviously rating any short article as a stub is safe. A moderately long article with more than 1 reliable source can usually be rated start. I never rate my own articles more than start for this reason, although they can be very long (eg München Hauptbahnhof). It is conceivable that some day somebody will raise the rating.--Grahame (talk) 01:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice. I figured tagging as stub or start would be OK, I'm not sure I'd be confident enough to rank any higher. I only ask because some other articles I've created a long while ago, such as Blue Collar Millionaires and 8 Minutes, still haven't been tagged, and I've been tempted to do it myself just so at least there is something there. Happy editing! User:Whats new?(talk) 04:39, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, most articles are tagged by their author for this reason.--Grahame (talk) 05:13, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015 in Australian television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Comedy Channel. 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) 09:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Potential admin
Hi, I notice you're on List of administrator hopefuls. Wikipedia would benefit from more admins. If you have been editing for more than 12 months (preferably 24+ months), and have been editing fairly consistently for the past 6 months (preferably 12+ months) with at least 100 edits a month (this tool will help) - or an explanation for any gaps, and haven't been blocked in the past three years - or a good explanation for a recent block, don't have a recent history of edit warring or arguing with other editors, feel you can explain why you wish to be an admin, can demonstrate some understanding of Wikipedia's procedures and processes, or know where to go for guidance, and are confident enough to go through a RfA, please get in touch with me. We can talk about it some more, and if all looks OK, I'll nominate you.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  09:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks for thinking of me. I think the first few requirements I would meet, but I did get into some (civil) disagreement with another editor over the fact that international premiere dates of television programs WERE notable for inclusion on Wikipedia (that saga took place on Talk:Fear the Walking Dead), though I'm still pretty confident I was correct on that one re WP:TVINTL. Also, I'm not sure if I have (yet) a wholly well-rounded grasp on all of Wikipedia's processes (I'd definently say I'm above average, but not sure if I'm of a level worthy of admin just yet). It is definently something I'm considering, if not for right now, then at some future point. And thanks again for the thoughts, advice and nomination offer. User:Whats new?(talk) 04:27, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry for delay in getting back to you (I should have let people know I have ping disabled). No worries if you feel you're not ready now. Get in touch with me - either on my talkpage or by email - when you feel you are ready, and we can have a chat. I've not yet looked into your contribution history, so I can't promise anything, but I do like that you are willing to put yourself forward as an admin, so I'm prepared to give you support and advice when you're ready.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  09:10, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 10 September
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * On the The Celebrity Apprentice Australia (season 4) page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=680341558 your edit] caused an unnamed parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F680341558%7CThe Celebrity Apprentice Australia (season 4)%5D%5D Ask for help])

Orphaned non-free image File:Racing.com logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Racing.com logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015 in Australian television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Home Fires. 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) 09:01, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

August 27
This date is the main annual feast day for the Society of Ian, a religious group. While the feast days of other cultures may seem insignificant or not notable by yourself, I think the adherents would disagree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.0.10 (talk) 03:39, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I don't see any notable references or sources, on Wikipedia or through a simple Google search, that suggests the Society of Ian is notable in any way. Can you provide any sources? User:Whats new?(talk) 03:47, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

August 27th
There are no articles I could direct you to about the Society, though I was hoping to have someone create an article here on Wikipedia soon. Being a small organization and spread thin- less than 300,000 estimated members worldwide- and beliefs which have been openly attacked, mocked and disregarded from the very beginning since the society was founded over forty years ago, the officials of the church maintain a low-visibility. I suppose little has changed in the regard that our beliefs are off-handedly dismissed. I won't bother to attempt to post our most important Holy day again on wikipedia. And while I will endeavor to take little insult at your callous treatment of our beliefs, please try to realize in the future that stating that someones religion (including ceremonies, important dates, et al) are "not notable" is insulting- especially since it belies the sentiments of the Westernized world: "If it isn't how/who/when/where we worship, then just isn't important". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.0.10 (talk) 04:17, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I am not criticising your religion in any way, but Wikipedia has a rather extensive set of policies, one of which includes WP:NOTABLE, which it seems your addition doesn't meet. Even through a Google search I could not find anything noteworthy about the organisation. Wikipedia requires third party sources to cover a particular topic. If you can come up with any, please feel free to create an article about the society yourself or put in a formal request here to have someone create it for you. User:Whats new?(talk) 04:23, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015 in Australian television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bruce Gordon. 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) 09:50, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

From Darkness
Thank you for putting down the Australian airdate for From Darkness the article that i created. I hope we can work together to expand the Article if is significant enough. --Angry Bald English Villian Man (talk) 07:01, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem, although I was really just adding the Aus premiere in passing. I don't have a particular interest in further expanding the article in detail. I'd suggest adding episode details, including original British airdate and local ratings per ep, in table form to make the article more significant. User:Whats new?(talk) 07:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

That's alright, but i saw many British imports such as In the Club and Ordinary Lies are on BBC First they were quite sucessful and i hope it's going to the same success for this programme. --Angry Bald English Villian Man (talk) 07:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Indeed it is a popular channel in Australia, but the ratings don't matter for any country other than Britain as to whether or not a TV show is deemed successful. International ratings don't matter one little bit, so the show's chance of renewal is determined solely by British viewership. User:Whats new?(talk) 10:00, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Racing.com logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Racing.com logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:48, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

TV Tonight
Per your edit summary at Fyi about TV Tonight: "Source is not a blog, it's a television news website and perfectly reliable source". Read the top line at TV Tonight as it states "Australia's leading TV blog" so it is clearly a blog not a reliable source. TV Tonight's about page states: "The site is the personal blog of Commentator, David Knox, ..." Spshu (talk) 13:40, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I accept that is how the site describes itself, but not all blogs are unreliable sources for Wikipedia's purposes, see WP:NEWSBLOG for example. I believe the source meets WP:IRS, and the website is used as a source by many people in relation to Australian media related articles on Wikipedia. If you disagree, I'd be happy to get a third party opinion or enter another form of dispute resolution if you'd like. -- Whats new?(talk) 00:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Australian Survivor
Hi their, thanks for your feedback. But how the heck do I add a reference? My goal is to update the page as much as possible as it had very little information on the episode recaps and contestants hometowns. Thanks, Jake. Added improperly, manually moved here: 01:53, 12 December 2015‎ Jake3101 (talk)

Orphaned non-free image File:9Life logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:9Life logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:24, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tsunami Warning System.JPG
 Thanks for uploading File:Tsunami Warning System.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:50, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Issa Schultz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain. 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) 09:07, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Style issues with Australian TV series
Hi, thanks for your good work on these. I've been going through them making partly script-operated and partly manual changes. Just a few points:
 * Some of the older ones introduced rafts of flag icons, which I've replaced with the country names (regrettably not quite in the right positions); the style guide discourages over-emphasis on nationality, and it's not immediately clear why this is of such importance in the tables where used.
 * Em dashes, and in a few cases hyphens, are sometimes used for year ranges; I've fixed these. The button for this is underneath the edit box in all cases, or the dash script can easily be loaded (ask me how). Straight-glyph apostrophes are mandated, not curlies (don't ask me why ...).
 * Subtitles: lower case after the first character, unless there's a proper name.

I'm also pinging User:Forbesy 777. I might go through your Sydney public transport articles with the script, too, if you don't mind.

My best, Tony   (talk)  09:34, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the minor formatting and style fixes. -- Whats new?(talk) 22:44, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

File:BBC First.png
Hi What's new? Please check the description for File:BBC First.png. The file only has non-free use rationale for BBC First. Since it's a non-free file, a separate, specific non-free use rationale is needed for each usage. You can add a rationale for BBC First (Australia) if you like, but I don't think a valid one can be written per Number 17 of WP:NFC. Generally, the logos of parent entities are OK for their articles, but not for articles about their subsidiaries/departments, etc. Sonething specific for Australia would be better as non-free. It might be a good idea to ask at WP:FFD for other opinions.

Also, I think this logo is probably simple enough for PD-USonly, but not sure about PD-logo because the BBC is a UK company and the UK has a stricter standard than the US when it comes to text logos. Another reason to ask about this file at FFD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 17:52, 16 March 2016 (UTC)


 * ✅ - sorted at Wikipedia talk:Files for discussion. -- Whats new?(talk) 05:19, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2016 in Australian television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Blacklist. 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) 09:35, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

STOP EDITING 7FLIX!
Basically, you keep putting back the citation needed thing in the info which says Saturday Disney moved on 7flix. But they did it already! Because of that, I finally took it out again (Which I keep doing on the page). But the one bellow still needs citation. So, PLEASE STOP EDITING THE PAGE! 180.200.153.78 (talk) 20:02, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Replied on IP users talk page. -- Whats new?(talk) 22:56, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sky News Australia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MediaWorks. 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) 09:58, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Events in 2016 in Australian Television Article
Hi Whats new?,

I am just enquiring as to whether there is a reason you stopped adding events to the 2016 in Australian television article? I always admired the amount of events you found and included and find it rather sad that at the moment there is only one event listed in the month of March. Of course I realise it is not your job to do it or anything but just wanted to know if there was a reason you stopped.

Thanks and keep up the great work,

Forbesy 777 (talk) 01:00, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey no real reason, it's something I typically do when I remember and have time to add a batch of events. It has been pretty bare. Thanks for the appreciation -- Whats new?(talk) 04:16, 9 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Ah that makes sense. Well after weeks of going through the News thread of TV Tonight I have finally gotten it up-to-date (well the events which were listed on TV Tonight anyway!). Now I just hope it stays that way :p. Now to go through the Programming and Pay TV threads to search for any missing premieres. I have always made an effort to add the Streaming titles as they are listed as this seemed to be something no one else was doing, but I think there are a few FTA and STV titles which have been missed recently. Thanks again and have a great weekend, Forbesy 777 (talk) 06:07, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * You've done well, great job. I'll attempt to assist also when I can. -- Whats new?(talk) 06:13, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Islands of Oz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Islands of Britain. 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) 09:51, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

I Wanted to Save You Some Time
I noticed this message and I wanted to save you some time. I also disagree with the revert of that edit and am considering undoing it. Though the editor who performed it was undoubtedly a sockpuppet, I performed some basic research on the material pertaining to the edit and I found it to be correct. I feel that the editor should be penalized or blocked for their questionable editing behaviors, but a good edit should be kept no matter who made it. Also, on a personal note, I have experience with ScrapIronIV's "editing philosophy." It seems to me that he often reverts edits of any user's whose beliefs do not align with his. He reverted several good pronunciation edits I made and is an obvious a Wikipedian opponent of the Catholic Church, of which I am a member. He even had the gall to recruit an administrator (he obviously has in his hip-pocket) to help him get a personal user sub-page of mine (which no one else would have seen) deleted. I just wanted to warn you before you questioned his behaviors any further. If you do wish to face him and his band of corrupt administrators, I will be glad to support you in any way I can. Happy editing, and God bless! ~Lord Laitinen~ (talk) 19:08, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input on this matter. I was under the impression the blocked user had form in regards to poor editing, and had simply not learned from or was ignoring requests to follow Wikipedia policies, notably in this situation, referencing new content added to edits. User:ScrapIronIV was entitled to revert unreferenced edits as he did, or simply add the citation needed tag. I was just making the point that if the user was blocked solely or primarily for that particular edit, it was probably unfair, but as I said - looking at the blocked user's history, it may not be the only instance. -- Whats new?(talk) 22:32, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Certainly. I would be glad to help with anything, anytime.  Adding a "citation needed" tag certainly would have sufficed.  As I stated above, I performed research and found the edits accurately described new information.  Indiscriminate removal of content based solely on the contributing user's edit history is more of a problem than most people realize, and I'm glad it wasn't overlooked by everybody.  Simply ask if you would ever like support in a situation which warrants it.  God bless!   ~Lord Laitinen~ (talk)  23:37, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:BLOCKEVASION There is a reason some editors are blocked. Such removal is not indiscriminate. If anyone wishes to reinstate the content, they are welcome to do so - but they take ownership of the content.  Scr ★ pIron IV 12:51, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should read WP:BLOCKEVASION, ScrapIron. It explicitly states that although "anyone is free to revert edits made in violation of a block...this does not mean that edits must be reverted just because they were made by a blocked editor (obviously helpful changes, such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism, can be allowed to stand)."  Also, don't accuse me of personal attacks ever again; I comment on content and my believed motives for the addition of such content, NOT the contributor.   ~Lord Laitinen~ (talk)  13:20, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dan Bourchier, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Darwin. 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) 11:56, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Woolooware High School
Hi Whats New?,

Unfortunately for me I am new to Wikipedia and are unsure of the strictures on this site. The information you have reverted to regarding the School may be referenced but it is Outdated or not relevant to the Schools modus operandi. Also the School Logo is incorrect. If you feel you disagree with the information i have modified and doubt my relevance to Woolooware High School please do not hesitate to contact my during school hours (7:30AM - 3:00PM) at the school on 0295236752, my name is Nicolas Purdon, the switch will happily put you through to me.

Kind Regards

Nicolas Purdon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nic.purdon (talk • contribs) 22:10, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

please leave the woolooware high school wiki alone
Hello,

Please do not revert changes to the Woolooware High wiki again. The changes to the page have been vetted by the school principal and i am the authorised social media representative charged with updating the school wiki page.

Regards

Nic — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nic.purdon (talk • contribs) 12:00, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Replied at User talk:Nic.purdon -- Whats new?(talk) 22:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I have left a brief third opinion at Talk:Woolooware High School. Thanks, /wiae /tlk  14:02, 15 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Replied at User talk:Wiae/wiae thanks i will follow your suggestions and endeavor to conform to the wiki guidelines. Thanks --Nic.purdon (talk) 23:08, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Woolooware High School
Hi Whats new?, as per the suggestions from yourself and waie i have been attempting to follow the wiki guidelines. can you please suggest how i am able to update the Woolooware High School logo as it has now been removed due to copyright violations. displaying no logo is much better than displaying the wrong logo however it is not a true reflection of the school and i am unsure how to prove i have permission from the logo copyright holder to upload the current logo. futhermore i cannot find any guidelines as per updating business logos. Nic.purdon (talk) 23:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC) (talk • contribs)
 * Hi, no problem. I've updated and replaced the existing WHS logo file with a copy of the newer version, so it now appears on the page. The reason why that file was deleted was because it was uploaded under a 'free licence', however the logo of a company or organisiation cannot be free, and thus must have a 'fair use' or similar licence. If you want or need to update the logo yourself, you can follow the instructions at File:Emblem whs.png under the section File History, where you'll find the link to "Upload a new version of this file." Hope that helps. -- Whats new?(talk) 07:20, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, ok so it appears you have changed it to the wrong (old) logo. i will try and follow your instructions. hopefully i will get it right this time --Nic.purdon (talk) 10:56, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh sorry about that. Yes, the instructions should help. Good luck! -- Whats new?(talk) 11:43, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

File:In 24 Hours logo.png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:In 24 Hours logo.png, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:22, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Border Security: America's Front Line
Yes, this is the same show as the previous BS: Canada's Front Line. I will be working on some better links as apparently the shows home page won't do. If necessary I will get an email of the producers or the network. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmulder (talk • contribs) 07:53, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I replied to this issue on the program's talk page. -- Whats new?(talk) 07:58, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 8 July
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * On the Speers Tonight page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=728841541 your edit] caused a URL error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F728841541%7CSpeers Tonight%5D%5D Ask for help])

Orphaned non-free image File:Laura Jayes.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Laura Jayes.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:05, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Notice of discussions regarding updates to MOS:TV
This is just a notification to a series of discussions that are taking place regarding updates to MOS:TV, given you participated in the discussion and/or expressed interest in the discussion seen here. You can find more information about the initiative and the discussions, here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:39, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Presto streaming logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Presto streaming logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

September 2016
Your recent editing history at Australian Survivor (season 3) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Chase (talk) 23:41, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Rating figures
You're undos to the viewer ratings on Finding Prince Charming are wrong and out of line as no one uses ones and they are only averaged to thousands, so you either fractionize it to millions or drop the pointless ,000's. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 10:06, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


 * PS, I'm being nice and not calling this an edit war, so please revert your undo. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 10:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Actually, my undos of your edits are correct. It is normal practice to either round to millions, or if all viewership numbers are under one million, write the full average viewership without rounding. If you believe that article is a special case or wish to change how the numbers are reported, you are welcome to begin a discussion on the article's talk page to acheive consensus. -- Whats new?(talk) 23:36, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The source is in thousands and you don't know the fraction below that (because Nielson don't provide that) so you are the one rounding to ",000". Stop added unsourced values to the figures. Please continue this on Talk:Finding Prince Charming. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 23:46, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Talk:Finding Prince Charming. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

List of longest running Australian TV shows
Further to what I wrote on the talk page of List of longest-running Australian television series, I would propose removing rank numbers, and sorting by years or seasons on air, similar to the American version of this list. I'd also recommend a references column (there is a severe lack of referencing), and a defined cut off for inclusion on the list (looks like at least 7 seasons seems appropriate based on where the list is at the moment). Thoughts? -- Whats new?(talk) 05:44, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I had a look at that American list and it does look like a better way to present the info. Sorting by years on air is a very good idea. It would actually make it easier to update the list as current shows move up the ladder. We can keep the shows that have run six years (for now) and revisit that. Are you volunteering to put the data in a new table? J Bar (talk) 06:16, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Replied at talk page. -- Whats new?(talk) 07:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BBC UKTV logo 2016.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:BBC UKTV logo 2016.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:35, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Village Centre Batemans Bay Logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Village Centre Batemans Bay Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:26, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Non-free use of File:Saturday Live Australia logo.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Saturday Live Australia logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the di-fails NFCC tag itself.

An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:18, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Have You Been Paying Attention? Cast section
Hi Whats new?,

Although I am a major contributor to the article, which in part has contributed to the article being upgraded to a C class, I am not actually the one who created the Cast table. It was actually an IP user who created it and included it as a subsection of the Episodes section. All I did was move it to the appropriately named Cast section after I created the List of Have You Been Paying Attention? episodes article and as a result removed the old, inappropriately formatted, episode tables. At this time I don't think I will be the one to change the Cast section to meet Wikipedia guidelines, but I do appreciate your message to get me out in front of it. Given Hulz46, KittyLover and Johnny_Stormer are the main contributors to that section perhaps you could notify them about the issue and they might be willing to correct it.

Thanks,

Forbesy 777 (talk) 03:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, I saw it was you who added the cast section, that's why I mentioned it to you. I'll leave it to others. By the way, you could have replied on your own talk page to the initial message, it helps keep the whole discussion in one place. -- Whats new?(talk) 03:13, 7 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the response. I apologise if my response came across as callous but I like to think that I have gotten the article to a stage which is more than acceptable, and now I should only need to add more edits if I notice a new edit does not comply with Wikipedia guidelines or if I believe I can help in some dispute. If I had realised prior to starting a new project then my reply would have been more likely a "thanks heaps will start working on a fix now", but Wikipedia is that big there are always new projects to move onto and I hate starting something and not finishing it. Haha sorry I guess it is my old school mentality which has me replying to people on their talk pages :p. I will definitely keep that in mind for future conversations :). Forbesy 777 (talk) 03:20, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

ISAN database
Eps are only entered into the database after production concludes. Aussie shows are generally produced well before they air due to uninterrupted broadcast runs during the season. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 21:05, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you have evidence that it is only AFTER production concludes? Evidence that the 4 additional episodes have been produced as part of season 1? A production site lists it as 6 episodes produced for S1 . -- Whats new?(talk) 22:30, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a production database, it doesn't accept un-produced material. Also channel seven are notorious for splitting production/season runs up unlike nine and ten that don't. Also no production run is commissioned for only six eps, it's eight or more. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 03:12, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * That site is a sales site, Screen can only sell the first six to overseas buyers. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 03:16, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Again, can you provide a reference that the ISAN site doesn't list unproduced episodes? Secondly, Screen Australia is not the distributor so it isn't selling the series to anyone. Thirdly, Channel Seven has commissioned many programs with six episode seasons (Wanted, Beach Cops to name a few). Fourthly, Nine and Ten also split seasons when it suits their schedule, but that is not at all relevant to The Secret Daughters episode length. -- Whats new?(talk)' 03:19, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually Screen Aus. is the gov. funding site not the prod. company. It's Screentime who aren't even listing it until Seven plays all ten eps. Beach Cops is a shitty reality show and I bet Seven did the same thing to Wanted and split the run up. Nine and Ten don't split runs up like Seven do on a regular basis. And you can't show me one ep in ISAN database that is still in-production or pre-production, because there aren't any. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 03:37, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You claimed Screen Aus was selling to overseas markets, I was contesting that point. You also claimed "no production run is commissioned for six eps" which I've disproven, whether you like the shows or not. "I bet Seven did" is not conclusive proof that Wanted was suppose to be more than six episodes, when references in the article demonstrate it was a six episode first season, and that is the same in the case of The Secret Dughter. Furthermore, you are the one making the claim about ISAN, you need to prove your claim that that is how that website works. Can you provide evidence to support your claim, like I have supported my claim that Seven does commission programs of six episode duration? -- Whats new?(talk) 04:26, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

No, you claimed Screen Aus. was a prod. company and I thought you were referencing a Screentime sales site at first. Screen Aus. have no idea how many eps are in one prod. run, they only provide public funding and a general site based on what's been broadcast. The Wanted ref to six eps is not from a prod. source either. ISAN clearly states |The Secret Daughter - Se 01 Ep 10 for the last ep, which means the tenth ep in the first prod. run. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 05:38, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You still haven't provided a reference that ISAN only includes produced episodes in its database. Perhaps Seven purchased 10 codes in case they wanted to order additional episodes, or to throw competitors off how many episodes would be scheduled. Screen Australia provided funding for six episodes. Australian Television indicates episode 6 is the finale. As do these sources: . Your other claims do not stack up, such as Seven don't produce 6-episode seasons which I previously disproved (by the way, other networks do to including Nine's Here Come the Habibs and Ten's Secrets & Lies), so again - you need to support your claims with reliable sources. If you can not, the content will be removed again. -- Whats new?(talk) 05:53, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Screentime adds to the ISAN database after a completed prod. run. Screentime do not have prod. runs below eight eps. Also all your refs refer to the number of eps broadcast this year. Se 01 means series one AKA first prod. run. Screen Australia only publicly state eps that have been scheduled for broadcast, not how many have been funded. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 02:01, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Also it's up to you to prove that the ISAN entries aren't valid. Until you can prove the four ISAN entries aren't part of the first prod. run, the entries are valid. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 02:14, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Again, you are making up claims. You again state that someone, in this case Screentime, "do not have prod. runs below eight eps." ANZAC Girls and Wolf Creek are six episode series produced by Screentime, so you are incorrect on that assumption. I've presented multiple sources claiming The Secret Daughters run is six episodes, where as you have presented just one, and despite repeated requests you still haven't provided any evidence that ISAN doesn't include unproduced episodes in its listings. Finally, you are the one using the reference claiming it as reliable, therefore it is up to you to defend your claim. I have already provided sources to the contrary. -- Whats new?(talk)' 03:10, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Your refs only relate to what's been scheduled or broadcast. The ISAN ref is the only one that clearly states their are ten eps in the first prod. run. It's up to you to find a prod. ref that invalids the ISAN ref. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 04:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Going around in circles a bit here. Can you provide a reference that states that anything listed with ISAN is for confirmed, already completed episodes airing as part of season 1? I agree that it is a 10 episode season if you can, but you have failed to do so despite multiple requests. The other refs are for what is scheduled, and that count is 6 episodes. I still see no evidence that an additional four episodes have been produced but remain unaired. Your ISAN ref does NOT prove production has been completed nor that eps 7 to 10 are planned as part of season 1. Further, the international distributor of the series, Zodiak Rights, which has the same parent company as Screentime, lists the series as a 6 part series (6 x 60') as seen here. -- Whats new?(talk) 07:13, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

You can't distribute eps past what's been broadcast by the primary buyer. Bottom line until there's a Screentime ref that corrects the ISAN entries, the ISAN entries stand. If Screentime entered more than they made there is nothing that states that. Just as there is nothing from Screentime that corrects that. Screentime would have to either list the series on their site or request removal of the four entries for prod. run one. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 13:34, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Again, you have still not proven your claim that ISAN lists or accepts unproduced episodes, nor any supporting evidence that episodes 7 to 10 are either planned as part of season 1 or were planned, that refutes the multiple sources I've provided. The distributor is owned by the same company as Screentime, and it states six episodes are part of the season. Again, you are relying on one source, and have not proven it works how you claim. I'm not convinced that ISAN is a reliable source in this case. Screentime's Facebook page notes tonight's episode is a season final, that being episode 6. -- Whats new?(talk) 23:32, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * As stated your refs only relate to what's been broadcast. Until the four ISAN entries are specifically refuted by a source or are removed, this discussion is mute. None of sources mention prod. run length and only relate to what Seven has defined as a season. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 00:20, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The discussion is not mute, the references all mention production length. The quotes in the previously mentioned references state "Screentime’s new 6 part drama" and "The Secret Daughter, a six-episode series which stars singer-songwriter Jessica Mauboy" and don't say 'Seven will air 6 episodes of a 10 episode series' or anything that supports your claim. Who says Seven has a different definition of a season to Screentime? As I pointed out earlier, Screentime have promoted yesterday's episode as the season finale. They didn't say 'tonight is the mid-season finale on Seven' or 'tonight is the sixth episode, the remaining four episodes will be shown next year.' -- Whats new?(talk) 00:26, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * That Screentime quote only states the production company, it doesn't say six produced parts. The facebook post is related to the last ep broadcast, not produced. Seven has split Packed to the Rafters and Winners and Losers seasons and cited the end of a season part as the finale. Discussion closed. 119.224.39.131 (talk) 02:17, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You haven't either proven your point nor achieved consensus, so the discussion is not closed. You continue to ignore my requests to demonstrate that ISAN doesn't included planned or abandoned episodes of series in its database. Just because Seven has split seasons of past programs doesn't mean it is happening in this case. What evidence do you have regarding those programs (quotes from production companies or media articles, etc) that show seasons with less episodes were advertised/promoted/planned than what ultimetely was broadcast? Series splits are not an issue if known further episodes have been flagged, but that is not the case with The Secret Daughter as I have flagged multiple times. You have not shown ONE further source that supports your claim, where as I have shown half a dozen now in this discussion alone. -- Whats new?(talk) 08:43, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

ISAN refs clearly state Se 1 for the other four eps meaning seven has clearly done the same thing as usual and split the season with the usual labeling the last part as a finale. Until you produce refs that invalidate the four ISAN refs, the four refs are part of season one. Discussion closed, and stop posting on an IP talkpage!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 119.224.39.131 (talk) 14:14, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I requested outside comment on the reliable sources noticeboard on this issue. A reply notes 2 ISAN user guides and policy manuals which doesn't state anything about your claim that everything on ISAN must be a completed work, the same issue I have not been able to find evidence of and you have failed to produce despite requests. -- Whats new?(talk) 02:51, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection policy RfC
You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob 13 Talk (sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))

Talking about the Go! Kids merge.
When the AfD for Go! Kids was closed, no one did an edit on the 9Go! page. Yeah that's right, '''no adding shows from the Go! Kids page, no removing redirects and other stuff'''. Today, I (properly) merged the page into 9Go! after many revert backs to the old page because of the bolded reason above, but you undid it! So, I decided to undo your edits because of this reason. Thanks. Aaron&#39;s The Best (talk) 03:01, 25 December 2016 (UTC).
 * Aaron, you have to start paying attention to people's messages to you and you need to stop and consider why multiple people disagree with you - a "merge" is almost never a case of moving all content from the old page to the new page, it means that you look at the article for any sourced info that is not in the receiving article and add that, with suitable rewriting to fit the receiving page. The receiving page in this case included all the relevant sourced info; if you disagreed with that you could have added those small bits of info which might have been missing without fussing about it or revert warring on the old article, but basically there was very litttle that could be added, per the outcome of the AfD. However, the existing para on Go! kids is very difficult to understand and so it could definitely do with a bit of editing to make it coherent. When several people revert your edits multiple times you do not start edit warring or state that you will "keep the page forever". Instead, you use the arricle talk page to suggest edits and ask how you might improve the content to make it acceptable. You are already at a final warning for disruptive editing, so please make an effort to edit collaboratively. Thanks, --bonadea contributions talk 07:29, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * As bonadea (and others) have pointed out, unsourced content and that reliant solely on primary citations aren't acceptable on any page. As you are on a final warning over unrelated edits, I would strongly suggest making more appropriate edits and engaging in discussion and consensus building, or your editing privilages may be suspended. -- Whats new?(talk) 23:37, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * All The Content Was Already There in 's edit summary does not mean that all the shows were there. That's right, no one did an edit to any section mentioning Go! Kids, including no adding the shows from the page, removing the now-redirect Go! Kids link and other stuff. Pretty much, I undid everyone's edits and will keep it like that. Thanks. Aaron&#39;s The Best (talk) 00:24, 26 December 2016 (UTC). This is an offical reply.
 * Again, you are not reading what multiple users are explaining to you. The 'list of shows' were unsourced or a few were based on primary sources without in-lines. You do not own the page, or any page on Wikipedia, as you appear to think you do. Wikipedia is based on consensus and policies. The policies state unsourced material is not permitted, and consensus on the article is Go! Kids does not have a seperate article, with relevent and sourced material merged into 9Go! and the remainder removed. You are incredibly close to losing all your editing rights if you continue this way. You've had multiple warnings. Not sure what is meant by "official reply" but it doesn't excuse your behaviour. -- Whats new?(talk) 01:08, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Just FYI: ANI notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Aaron's The Best: Ownership and CIR issues. --bonadea contributions talk 11:37, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Unscored edit was actually an cut-paste.
So you undid my edit on SES/RTS, saying it was unscored and I wrote it. It was actually an cut-paste from the other WIN station pages! Anyway, you misunderstood and was undone now due to your misunderstanding. Also, after that Go! Kids discussion on your talk page, I added the full list of shows from that page back onto the page, and no one undid it! Still, you don't understand cut-pastes, so you should go and look at many and add citation needed tags onto anything that is unscored. Thanks. Aaron&#39;s The Best (talk) 03:15, 30 December 2016 (UTC).
 * Yes I did revert your edit. Even if it is a copy-paste edit, the rules around verifiability still stand. As the editor who added the material, the burden of proof lies with you to provide a citation indicating the material is correct. Other parts of the article suggest that the Seven and Nine signals are carried by the stations in question, yet the material you added suggest Ten content is carried. With regards to Go! Kids, I'm happy you are happy with the content on the Go! page. There are still no citations for the list however, meaning any editor can remove them citing lack of verifiability, which is what I have done with SES/RTS - I am unable to verify the claim, thus I have removed it. Please add it back with a citation or don't add it back at all. Citation needed tags can be used at an editor's discresion if they believe the claim to be true but can't find a source. I don't believe the claim you made, but would be happy to be proven wrong with evidence. Thanks -- Whats new?(talk) 07:39, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
 * , in addition to what What's new? says above (which you have to read and understand since you have been warned many many times about adding unsourced material), you should never cut and paste a paragraph from one Wikipedia page to another - see Copying within Wikipedia. Please try to understand that editing Wikipedia is extremely complex, and if an experienced editor undoes your edits it is pretty likely that it is not because they don't understand your edits. In this case, you were told exactly what the problem was (no sources) and yet you restored the edit. Why? --bonadea contributions talk 10:49, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Reality show notability
I see you tagged Laurina Fleure for notability. I don't particularly object to the tag, but I was going by WP:ENTERTAINER: "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions". I guess the guideline is mainly written for actors, but wouldn't it apply to reality contestants as well? StAnselm (talk) 03:43, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes you are correct to refer to WP:ENTERTAINER, and it is geared towards actors, however I would suggest that person doesn't qualify. What was significant about her role in either The Bachelor or I'm A Celebrity apart from the fact she happened to be in it for a time? She has appeared in just 2 programs, and wasn't in a major role in either one. She didn't win either show, nor become particularily notable in either one. She is not covered particularily well by secondary sources either outside coverage of either program. She certainly doesn't meet #2 or #3 of the ENTERAINER criteria, and I'd propose she doesn't meet #1 either if the article was put up for deletion. -- Whats new?(talk) 03:48, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, one of the problems is that most of the sources are tabloids, but apparently "She was one of the most popular contestants on The Bachelor". StAnselm (talk) 04:22, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * But again, that doesn't make her notable because one source says she was kind of popular. If that were the case, nearly every contestant on every reality show worldwide would have a Wikipedia article. If you want to keep the article, you need to establish actual evidence of notability through reliable sources. As I said earlier, I don't think participating in 2 reality shows is qualification alone. Ash Pollard was in both My Kitchen Rules and Dancing with the Stars but she does not have an article because she does not meet notability requirements, and I believe Fleure is much the same. -- Whats new?(talk) 04:26, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I see that at Articles for deletion/Laurina Fleure you said "This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions", but I don't see it at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Australia. Did you actually include it? StAnselm (talk) 21:49, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Good pick up, thanks. -- Whats new?(talk) 23:19, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Binge logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Binge logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:12, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Showcase logo 2016.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Showcase logo 2016.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:11, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Speers Tonight, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gary Gray. 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) 09:54, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2017 in Australian television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Casey Donovan. 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) 10:46, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

MOS:TVCAST
Honestly, I don't care what other example goes there, but it should not be The Newsroom. Let's find something else... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:05, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not attached to The Newsroom but I'm not sure what your issue with it is. It complies and is out of production so unlikely to be altered dramatically. -- Whats new?(talk) 21:18, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It's "non-standard" (and note that I indicated I wanted it replaced back in the MOS revision discussion: I just wasn't going to make a big deal about it there because I wanted your proposed text to pass) – but The Newsroom contains a 'Guest stars' list section which I've said repeatedly I'm adamantly opposed to, it includes a "Co-stars" list (I've never seen that used anywhere else), and it lists the guest stars before the co-stars which just seems totally wrong to me! Bottom line: if it's linked to from MOS:TV, it needs to be both an example of our regular "standard" format article (i.e. the 'Cast' section format used at many of our TV articles), and it needs to be among our best TV article examples. I found Fringe (TV series) which seems to meet both criteria: it's an article with a "standard" 'Cast' section formatting, and it's one of WP:TV's good articles. So I think that solves the issue (though if you find a TV article that meets these two criteria, but has even shorter character summaries, please feel free to switch to that!). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:26, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I understand your point of view there, thanks for the explanation. Fringe looks good, although there are 2 issues I spot (which I think should be edited rather than justification for looking for yet another example) - (a) the main section uses colons while the recurring uses commas, and obviously for consistency it should be one or the other, and (b) Kirk and Mark have episode counts which is a no-no! -- Whats new?(talk) 21:36, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Heh! – Totally missed that. Yeah, if you don't get to fixing that, I'll get to it on my end by tonight... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:37, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah I'll deal with it -- Whats new?(talk) 21:40, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Speers Tonight, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Alexander. 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) 10:44, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Georges River Council logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Georges River Council logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 7 April 2017 (UTC)