User talk:BoogerD

Disney Streaming Service

OK. Get where you're coming from. But don't you think that we should create a new section then for shows like Scarlet Witch, Bucky & Falcon etc. They are being planned/considered so it would make sense to put them into a different section to those who have already been confirmed. Mystic Moore (talk) 09:37, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

No, I don't think a third section is necessary. Most streaming service "list of" articles split upcoming programming into "ordered" and "in development". As it relates to Disney+, Disney hasn't even commented on the potential Scarlett Witch or Winter Soldier and Falcon limited series nor have they commented on other shows said to be in development. Honestly, most networks don't officially comment on a production until they've officially ordered it. The Loki limited series is the only one Disney has confirmed is in development. However, it is still simply "in development" just as the other shows are. Doesn't seem to be a need to give a single show its own sub-section. Additionally, all of the shows/series said to be in development were reported/announced by reliable, secondary sources such as industry trade magazines over a century old so the veracity of their reporting is almost without question. Hope that cleared it up a bit. Feel free to discuss it further if you feel so inclined. – BoogerD (talk) 10:27, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Short Treks

I was not aware of the ongoing discussion, the section on list just looked like it was time (time to leave the "nest"). Also, I spent some time updating the article from the draft, it was not a simple cut and paste as the draft was clearly outdated. Thanks. Starspotter (talk) 18:57, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

I'd advise you to add to the discussion on the talk page if you would like and to edit the draft if you feel it is out of date and needs updating. – BoogerD (talk) 18:58, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Sure, done and done. Cheers. Starspotter (talk) 19:07, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for the heads up! Meow!

Starspotter (talk) 19:14, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Kominsky Method, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eddie Edwards (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Swipe Right for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Swipe Right 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swipe Right until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Polyamorph (talk) 22:05, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, BoogerD. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:PatriotTitleScreen.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PatriotTitleScreen.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) 04:02, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Happy Turkey Day!

— Lbtocthtalk has given you a Turkey! Turkeys promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a turkey, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy Thanksgiving! Spread the goodness of turkey by adding {{Thanksgiving Turkey}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

— Lbtocth^talk 01:11, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Do you even watch Murphy Brown?

Julius is sarcastic. It's a fact, describing a character. Wikifan128 (talk) 15:30, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Article owning

I know we have the same goals here, but you should know that some of your edits and comments feel like article owning. I respect your edits, but sometimes they are nitpicky without improving the overall article, such as removing a perfectly valid citation, or objecting to re-wording a sentence for clarification. Again, I don't mean to sound hostile here, but some of your actions do come off as slightly aggressive, as if you own these articles, which might in turn discourage other editors. Just thought you should know. Cheers – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 05:31, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

@Broccoli and Coffee: I'm sorry if that is the impression that you have been left with. I can assure you that, from my end, I certainly have no intention of trying to assert ownership over any article that I have contributed to. I edit on Wikipedia in order to contribute to a worthwhile project that I firmly believes benefits the world-at-large. I check my watchlist quite frequently every day and monitor articles that I have spent time working on. That being the case, I will more often than not take a look at an article's history to see what the latest revisions have been. As it relates to what I believe you were alluding to above, I had valid reasons for revisions I made and I did not make them simply to assert control over a page or to shift things to my preferred version. With the "Influence" section, I removed a citation that was unnecessary. It itself actually cites the article that was already used as a source and didn't provide any additional information. I cited WP:OVERCITE as a reasoning for its removal. The other citation I did not remove the second time it was added was it was placed within the context of a new sentence. I did, however, reformat the citation in order for it to stay consistent with the formatting style established in the article. Lastly, I fully and wholeheartedly appreciate good and well-written. I was very pleased and heartened to see that you had added original episode summaries to the article. They greatly improved its overall quality. I make mistakes everyday both here on Wikipedia and in real life. For that, I hope I will be afforded a little grace and understanding for my own human foibles. I will say that I have been guilty in the past of judging an editor for before getting to know them or hear them out after having made my mind up about them through their editing pattern or edit summaries. Sometimes my first impression proved accurate but more often than not I have been pleasantly surprised to find a lot of people on here are editing in goodwill and that things may have gotten lost-in-digital-translation. Thanks for reaching out to me and I hope to talk more soon (as my schedule allows it). Sincerely, BoogerD (talk) 05:56, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

BoogerD, of course. Again, we absolutely have the same goals here in trying to contribute to Wikipedia the best we can, and I've not once taken your comments or edits in bad faith. I only brought it up for the sake of possibly discouraging other newer editors. For my part, I apologize if I've come across as defensive at all. All in all, I do think we are on the same page and have similar mindsets, and I agree that the lost-in-digital-translation aspect is partly to blame. Thank you for the thoughtful response. I look forward to working with you further. Cheers – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 06:23, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

@Broccoli and Coffee: I was glad to receive your message. I look forward to our future editing alongside each other. You know, its funny, some of the folks on here that I have come to rely on or ask advice from started off as editors with whom I was having a disagreement with. These sort of editors have become a part of a small list of wiki-friends that I run into quite a bit every month. I think it ultimately boils down to passionate people actually trying to do good here. Yeah sometimes you get trolls who are only looking to cause trouble and rile people up but it is more frequently the case that both parties are trying to achieve the same thing. Given my past experiences, I forsee a bright and fruitful future for both of us on here. Sincerely, BoogerD (talk) 06:38, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

episodes lists

Hi, I started a discussion involving you here. Your input is welcome. Best regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 08:59, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Untitled Cassian Andor series

Thanks for your wonderful contributions. I cant wait to watch this. Hayholt (talk) 18:14, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

No problem. I'm excited too! – BoogerD (talk) 18:15, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Question. I am wondering why starwars.com is utterly rejected for the page. Its fine we give deference to secondary sources but is there a particular reason to completely rely on secondary sources? 1 or 2 primary is good. Hayholt (talk) 13:14, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

It's just general Wikipedia policy as outlined in the MOS to avoid using primary sources as they are typically too close to the subject of the article. Reliable, secondary sources give a greater bit of distance and objectivity from their subject. Also, this is no need to add sources to the lead paragraph when the information being cited is already cited in the body of the article. – BoogerD (talk) 15:43, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:DisneyPlus.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DisneyPlus.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) 03:29, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Picard (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Nevins (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. JDDJS (talk) 03:25, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Nice job getting all the new star trek show articles up to speed. Meow!

Starspotter (talk) 12:30, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Just because Hayholt (talk) 16:49, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Star Trek series

Hey, BoogerD. I noticed that you created both Picard and Star Trek: Lower Decks. Just wanted to let you know, since neither of them have begun filming yet, they should exist in the draftspace until filming does start, and the current information should reside at Star Trek. -- Alex^TW 06:17, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough. My mistake. I'll go ahead move them now. – BoogerD (talk) 06:23, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

File:FleshAndBlood.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

File:TheBody.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Pooka.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Queen America

Hi BoogerD,
You were talking about this reliable source [1], right? It said "Westfeldt’s status is recurring with Justice attached to the project for dual-episodes." Dual-episodes mean two episodes. It's not recurring. — Lbtocth^talk 00:53, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

I can't enter into a debate or dispute right now. Just can't stomach it. I try and spend the grand majority of my time on Wikipedia creating articles or drastically improving stubs or just-started articles. Substantial editing as I see it. Yet, somehow about half of my time on here gets filled with debating over details and minutia. You know my feelings regarding recurring classifications as it relates to two or three episodes. I will say that I genuinely thought I remembered the article as having originally announced her as recurring and that's why I said that in the edit summary. Do what you must; I won't protest at least not tonight. – BoogerD (talk) 01:01, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

The article is only referring to Jennifer Westfeldt as recurring though. — Lbtocth^talk 01:08, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Like I said...I misremembered the wording of the article. You've already pointed out its exact wording. I honestly just can't converse about this subject this evening. I know you've currently got other discussions going on over other issues tonight and so I, genuinely, do not want to engage you in a further one to have to respond to. You're going to do as you see fit; so be it. I'm willing to move on from it tonight and see to other issues if for nothing else that for my sanity's sake. – BoogerD (talk) 01:14, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

I started the discussion to avoid edit warring. I will be respecting your wishes to move on from this for tonight. Thanks. — Lbtocth^talk 01:38, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Take part in a survey

Hi BoogerD

We're working to measure the value of Wikipedia in economic terms. We want to ask you some questions about how you value being able to edit Wikipedia.

Our survey should take about 10-15 minutes of your time. We hope that you will enjoy it and find the questions interesting. All answers will be kept strictly confidential and will be anonymized before the aggregate results are published. Regretfully, we can only accept responses from people who live in the US due to restrictions in our grant-based funding.

As a reward for your participation, we will randomly pick 1 out of every 5 participants and give them $25 worth of goods of their choice from the Wikipedia store (e.g. Wikipedia themed t-shirts). Note that we can only reward you if you are based in the US.

Click here to access the survey: https://mit.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_eXJcEhLKioNHuJv

Thanks

Avi

Researcher, MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy --Avi gan (talk) 05:15, 15 December 2018 (UTC)