User talk:Recollected

No worries

It's all good, I've seen it happen quite often myself so I was almost amused when I saw that you had reverted it for that reason lol So no worries Lady Lotus (talk) 00:28, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Silicon valley startup template discussion

Please let your discussion run its course. if you no longer feel it needs deletion, just add a comment saying " i have changed my mind, keep arguments are correct", which may cause an admin to close it immediately. by editing it out, you lose history, and the article is listed at 2 wikiprojects as having a deletion discussion, which may confuse people. I happen to agree with your initial assessment that its not worth keeping (for some additional, if different, reasons), but i would hopefully give the same advice if it was own creation and my favorite template of all time:).Mercurywoodrose (talk) 23:30, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS: wow, 51 articles since august, not bad. thanks for growing the web of WP. every single potential article deserves a chance.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 23:39, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

South Beach Tow

Thanks for cleaning up the infobox after I added the image. Andrew³²⁷ 23:22, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Killer Karaoke

Thanks for the love on my talk page and the episode numbers! - SkipperRipper (talk) 04:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do No Harm

The show takes place in Philadelphia, it seemed like the easiest place to add it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.82.22.68 (talk) 01:52, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mulheres Ricas

mulheres ricas is not a real housewives show and there for needs to be deleted from that page, only shows with the official title of " the real housewives" should been put on that page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.179.44.127 (talk) 00:41, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Just wanted to say thanks for the Barnstar, I really appreciate it! All the best. --Bobak (talk) 00:57, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Real Husbands of Hollywood.

I work for this show, and episode 8 is titled "Hollyhood Scuffle" Not Hollywood. Thanks :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.183.87.56 (talk) 14:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In Recognition of Your Service

		The Original Barnstar
		I hope that you will accept this barnstar given for appreciation of your hard-work and persistence in updating television ratings information. 24.0.133.234 (talk) 20:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I second this. For you Long Island Medium work - Dave3457 (talk) 04:16, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The

Please don't change templates like Template:CBSNetwork Shows (current and upcoming) and Template:ABCNetwork Shows (current and upcoming) to count THE in alphabetizations without achieving consensus to do so at WP:TV.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:43, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my! I am quite sorry for the mistake, and thank you for appropriately fixing my errors. I input the lists on an alphabetizer, which explains why titles might shift around. Again, thank you for fixing my mistake and it's greatly appreciated.--Recollected (talk) 02:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Citation Barnstar
	Thank you for your great contribution to the citations of Barter Kings. The article greatly needed your citations. James3167 (talk) 15:16, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate it! --Recollected (talk) 22:52, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Documentary

Just wanted to let you know that "documentary" is generally not appropriate for any reality shows. I know that TLC has that habit of labeling their stuff "docu-drama"-but that would be considered self-promotion I think? And at any rate, "docu-drama" (especially when a reality show), is not the same as documentary.24.0.133.234 (talk) 20:46, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I add documentary because that's what all these series are noted as. If you refer to The Futon Critic, and search these series, look under genre and you will find both reality and documentary. That's all I have to comment on the matter. Cheers. --Recollected (talk) 20:52, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the way that Futon Critic handles "genre" that is where they classify- I think that the reason they are using "Reality/Documentary" is because they also have "Reality/contest"-(like Survivor, or something competitive). Television Without Pity also has two sections for Reality. They have a Reality/Competitive and Reality/Candid. This is going to be a problem for me and I am not blaming you, but this is kind-of messed-up. There are two items on the Wikipedia infobox template-"format" and "genre", if you look at the inclusion for genre, on Wikipedia-Reality is specifically named as NOT being "documentary"^[1] "Documentaries, television news and sports television are usually not classified as reality shows.". But there are no clues for what "format"-means on Wikipedia that I can find-maybe in the template discussions? I have been deleting "documentary"-when I see it as per: Personally I think that should mean "series" but maybe it should not be filled-in if 'genre" is?
Also-if you look at the list of "documentary" television shows on The Futon Critic, there are some examples of shows that could actually fit as documentary http://www.thefutoncritic.com/showatch.aspx?series=&network=&daycode=&statuscode=&genre=reality+%28documentary%29&studio= but some that don't. That is just how Futon Critic organizes their site because all of those shows are not documentary in format or genre. Television Without Pity also has two categories for Reality--"Competitive" and "Candid", so I think that both sites are trying to distinguish between contests and "other" Reality shows, but documentary is a misnomer for many reality shows whether they are not contests or not.24.0.133.234 (talk) 15:21, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also-I don't want to fool with the infobox template, but I think that you should see this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Infobox_television/Archive_3#Format_Parameter filling-in BOTH would just continue the problem in my opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.133.234 (talk) 15:44, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also-Is there any way that you could please slow-down on the changing/adding of format/genre info. please? I'm trying to fix and move to "genre"-Reality but I'm seeing your edits in almost every one that I find. Not trying to "war"-here but it does appear that "Format" is a parameter for deletion! It is quite jarring to see shows such as "Hogan Knows Best" with the "documentary" label in the infobox. and it sticks out like a sore-thumb to me.24.0.133.234 (talk) 16:18, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way you can leave me alone? You've falsely reported me as a sockpuppet, and stated to me: "Hop off my dick please!". Why should I help you? Why should I listen to what you have to say after you were disrespectful to me? --Recollected (talk) 16:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the insult-that was not aimed at you~ The point is that your edits to "format" and "genre" are causing some confusion and a problem and I am asking you to please slow down with that 'till it is better understood. And yes i saw your image-switch and I liked the old one better.Not trying to attack you personally, but like I said I am seeing this "format" problem and your name is connected to the problem in most instances-nothing personal and again, that comment was not meant for you-sorry24.0.133.234 (talk) 16:36, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll explain it to you. In my mind, these series are reality-documentary. Especially on shows like Double Divas, where the premise of the series is documenting the daily life at their store. Documentary television series with a reality television format, because the cameras are there capturing the "reality" of it all. Even though half the reality shows on TV seem to be scripted somewhat. I can see where you're coming from though and hopefully it can be sorted out. As per the image, well first off it's not what you do or do not like - Wikipedia is a community. The new image is sized properly and clearer which is why I uploaded it. I don't possess the administrative power to revert it so it's going to have to stay. --Recollected (talk) 17:05, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK-just so you understand that it is not personal just that your edits happen to be associated with a lot of Reality shows and this "format/documentary"-bug is something that is a little tricky. I am planning-on logging-into a library reference to do a little more research since the category "Documentary/Television" is a little weird anyways. But for now at least it might be a good idea to leave "format"-alone since it looks like it was supposed to be deleted in favor of "genre"? "Double Divas"? Is arguable but I'd probably go further myself like Animal Planet/National Geographic and maybe some Oprah Network,(based-on camera-set-up and editing style?) but having it in the info-box makes me nervous since that has the possibility of linking things to lists/categories where "Documentary" does not fit, and diluting the meaning-of "Documentary/television in general. Also-can you please undo your edit to The Real Housewives of New Jersey logo? The 1st one was better and had complete permissions-no need to change it.24.0.133.234 (talk) 17:23, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm aware that it's not a personal attack. I do agree with you though, Wikipedia does in fact need to have a better differentiation of documentary films and documentary television series. As for the infobox issue, you can voice your opinion about possibly having the "format" part deleted on the talk page of the Manual of Style for Television which is where the code for the infobox is located. --Recollected (talk) 17:34, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Motive

Hi

Your edits to the cast list included taking out the ";" and replacing with "—". Unfortunately that is not quite right, I did put them as ";" when they should have been ":" - it seems my shift key was not working correctly?

If you read the TV MoS, it says:

Another means of displaying the information would be in a "ACTOR as CHARACTER" format. Here, the actor and character's names are followed by a colon ":"

Chaosdruid (talk) 18:25, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thank you for taking the time to explain the situation and including a reference. I'll make sure it doesn't happen again. --Recollected (talk) 22:56, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guinness World Records Gone Wild

I didn't see anything unusual in this at all beyond using the bare PR summaries within the article; I'm thinking the editor was acting in good faith and just wanted to break it out into a List of article, which wouldn't be a problem if we weren't so early in the first season. List of article redirected to the proper section in the main article, and the episode summaries have been redone to be more neutral. If they persist later on a warning may be appropriate, but right now I have no plans to sanction them. Nate • (chatter) 03:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sounds good. Thanks for the help, it's greatly appreciated! --Recollected (talk) 03:54, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article Feedback deployment

Hey Recollected; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:33, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hi Recollected: Thank you for the Barnstar! Much appreciated. - Froid 04:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Season 25: Oprah Behind The Scenes

Hi Recollected: You have done some fantastic show pages for OWN shows- thanks for your great work! When you get a chance and if you are interested, maybe you can improve the Season 25: Oprah Behind The Scenes page. Numerous people have tried to improve it over the years but no one has done a very good job. Thanks so much!

YOU ARE AMAZING!!! Thanks for your fantastic work. WillowFeldman (talk) 01:17, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Glad I could help. – Recollected ™ 01:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dukes of Melrose, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Museum of Contemporary Art (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) 19:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

^ "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_television". {{cite web}}: External link in |title= (help)

[1] "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_television". {{cite web}}: External link in |title= (help)

[1]