User talk:NoD'ohnuts

Hello, D'ohMonkeyBalls! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! In.Lumine.Tuo.Videbimus.Lumen (talk) 22:59, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply] Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images • create your first article Intuitive guide to Wikipedia • Article Creation Wizard Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

The account you created has been blocked indefinitely because its username is a blatant violation of our username policy – it is obviously profane; threatens, attacks or impersonates another person; or suggests that your intention is not to contribute to the encyclopedia (see our blocking and username policies for more information). We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, but users are not allowed to edit with inappropriate usernames, and trolling or other disruptive behavior is not tolerated. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Daniel Case (talk) 03:03, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

NoD'ohnuts (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I did not know this and is it possible I could change my name at least and can you pleas at least put a date

Decline reason:

Use {{unblock-un|<new username here>}} to request unblock so that you can get a name change, but please bear in mind what names aren't acceptable. —Jeremy ^(v^_^v Dittobori) 21:20, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Allowing username change to NoD'ohnuts (talk · contribs). Please put this request in at Wikipedia:Changing username as soon as possible to avoid re-blocking. Request handled by: TNXMan Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

Thank you I have asked and it is pendingD'ohMonkeyBalls (talk) 00:19, 10 April 2010 (UTC)D'ohMonkeyBalls (soon to be NoD'ohnuts)[reply]

A question

You wouldn't happen to be user:TheSimpsonsRocks, would you? Your edits are quite similar. -- Scorpion^0422 22:35, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NoNoD'ohnuts (talk) 22:54, 11 April 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

Are you sure? You appeared out of nowhere and started picking up where you last stopped, adding reception and ratings to episodes. The only difference is that you implemented what I suggested last time. [1]

The irony is that if you had just accepted your block and sat it out, it would be over now.

I'll make you a deal. If you agree to sit out the rest of your last block (1 month, starting April 1, so for the rest of the month), I will get your original account unblocked. And, once your block is finished, I will help coach you so that you can avoid being blocked again. Since you keep coming back, it's obvious that you enjoy editting, but creating sock puppets is not the way to go, and you'll just keep getting blocked. -- Scorpion^0422 22:09, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

K, but I don't remember my password to TheSimpsonsRocks.NoD'ohnuts (talk) 23:26, 12 April 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

Okay, so no more editting until May (would you like this account to be blocked until then so you can avoid temptation?). Once May hits, you can pick an account and stick to it. -- Scorpion^0422 23:31, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No just leave it but my talk and account page don't count though rightNoD'ohnuts (talk) 23:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

Yes, they don't count. -- Scorpion^0422 00:00, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just checking in to remind you that you have a week left. I can't help but notice that some IPs have been making edits similar to the ones you used to make. I really hope you aren't cheating. -- Scorpion^0422 00:39, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No I am not cheating me and my family were in Kenya. It might have been my brother though. By the way how can I join Wikipedia:WikiProject The SimpsonsNoD'ohnuts (talk) 22:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

I'll take your word for it. Once May 1 has arrived, you are more than welcome to join the Simpsons project. All you have to do is add your name here. -- Scorpion^0422 00:40, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can I edit talk pagesNoD'ohnuts (talk) 22:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

DYK for You Have 0 Friends

On April 21, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article You Have 0 Friends, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Family Portrait (Modern Family)

Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Theleftorium 21:37, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know you're User:TheSimpsonsRocks and have been blocked for copyright violations before, so if I see you copying content from sources again you will be blocked indefinitely. Theleftorium 21:37, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

K srryNoD'ohnuts (talk) 21:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

Welcome back

Your block is now over (although I am fairly certain you edited using IPs, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt), would you like your old account unblocked? I see you've already jumped back into editing, and gotten into some trouble. It is very important that you not copy anything directly from a source without changing anything. Wikipedia is meant to be free content, so contributions have to freely licensed. Simply, it means that you have to rewrite things in your own words. If you want, you can show me something you've written (preferably a few paragraphs in length), and I can take a look and try to give you some tips to improve your writing. Either way, please stop copying and pasting. -- Scorpion^0422 03:05, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a tip, I've noticed that you keep using just a link when you add references. It's better to use a citation template, which provides more information and makes things easier to read. This is the template for websites:

<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/TV/02/13/simpsons.300/index.html|title=The Simpsons Rakes in the D'oh!|accessdate=2008-09-10|date=2003-02-13|author=Tanz, Jason|publisher=CNN}}</ref>

Just change the fields where needed. You can leave certain fields blank if necessary (usuually author and date), but you should always have a url, title, publisher and accessdate (that's the day you first used the source in the article).

I've also noticed that you tend to use short and confusing wording, often with typos. For example, from this edit:

"The episode as long with three other episodes from the season was nominated for Animation at the Writers Guild of America Award, but lost to Futurama's "Godfellas""

A better way to word it would be: "The Bart Wants What It Wants was one of four Simpsons episodes to be nominated in the Animation category at the Writers Guild of America Awards. It lost to the Futurama episode "Godfellas".

If you have any questions, or need help, don't hesitate to ask. -- Scorpion^0422 23:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that so far you have ignored all of my advice, and you're just continuing your old editing patterns. Looking through this edit, I see you're still using unformatted links, confusing and repetitive wording, and have a lot of mistakes and typos (such as referring to Nancy Kruse as a man). If you want to ignore me, then it's up to you, but part of the reason you're able to still use this account is because I tried to get you a second chance so you could continue editing. You obviously enjoy editing, but when you resist others' attempts to help you improve then all you are doing is hurting the site by inserting typos and inaccuracies, and creating work for others who have to fix your mistakes. -- Scorpion^0422 18:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

Echoing mostly what Scorpion0422 said above, it'd be great if you could please improve your editing habits. You obviously seem to enjoy editing, but it's annoying to have to check your edits (mainly TV show-related, such as The Office) and fix the mistakes you make. Like spelling and punctuation, you always misspell receive, using it's when its is correct, etc. Your Internet browser should have a built-in spell checker. Most of all it's when you place references, you just mimic the cite templates and don't actually use them. Take a look at one of my recent edits fixing your references. Again, you seem you really enjoy editing, so please just improve some of your habits. Also, don't take this as being angry, just some tips. Thank you. Drovethrughosts (talk) 14:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

About your recent editing for references I was wondering if I could keep doing what I'm doing on that for references since it has the same effectNoD'ohnuts (talk) 21:53, 25 June 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

Well, obviously I can't force you to change your habit for references. It's just when you do it your way, you're not entering the title of the article, just using the plain URL to act as the link and a result, it's looks a bit messy. Look at the Whistleblower (The Office)#References section compared with the Company Picnic#References section. Anyway, I still suggest to use the Cite web template because then you don't have to worry about having to correctly mimic the template, by remember to add brackets around dates, adding "Retrieved on [date]", or italicizing the website name.

All the parameters you pretty much need are:

<ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |author= |date= |work= |accessdate= }}</ref>

Anyway, feel free to take my advice or not. Drovethrughosts (talk) 23:07, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"To Surveil With Love"

So why did you remove the lines I added to the "Cultural references" section? It was about "1984" and "Inglourious Basterds". (129.187.19.220 (talk) 14:17, 28 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]

It was probably unsourced and we're trying to make the article a good articleNoD'ohnuts (talk) 16:55, 28 June 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

In several episode articles there aren't any "sources" of references at all. Even in "To Surveil With Love" there is one reference without any source. So why didn't you remove that one? (I am not saying that you should remove it, BTW) (129.187.19.220 (talk) 21:45, 28 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]

I know several episodes have unsourced references but i'm working on the current season to make them sourced and I guess I missed that oneNoD'ohnuts (talk) 04:44, 29 June 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

The references to 1984 are obvious and already mentioned in the first section, so what is the point of adding these sources anyway? I think it is a "nice-to-have", but I consider providing a source to trivial facts as not necessary. (129.187.19.220 (talk) 20:36, 29 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Well that's not how Wikipeida worksNoD'ohnuts (talk) 20:49, 29 June 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

Your GACs

You're missing step 3 for all of your GAs To Surveil With Love, The Squirt and the Whale, Judge Me Tender, and The Simpsons 20th Anniversary Special – In 3-D! On Ice!. I'd add them, but then it would show me as the nominator. CTJF83 chat 19:40, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Add {{subst:GAN|subtopic=name of the subsection on this page where the article is listed}} to the top of the nominated article's talk page.

CTJF83 chat 19:40, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GANs

Please do not nominate any more Simpsons articles at WP:GAN. The are not ready. Can you please withdraw the ones you have already nominated? Theleftorium ^(talk) 20:02, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The next time you plan on submitting an article, can you nominate it for peer review first so I can give tips on improvements? Regards, Theleftorium ^(talk) 13:16, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Treehouse of Horror XXI

The reason why there should be no cultural references section until after an episode airs is simple and obvious: The episode hasn't aired yet, so how do we know what will or won't be in the episode? Most of those references are actually already mentioned on the page in other sections. Besides, in a month, this whole silly argument won't matter any way, so is it really that hard to wait until the episode airs? -- Scorpion^0422 22:49, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just thought since we've been doing it before that we should just put the cultural references like we've done beforeNoD'ohnuts (talk) 22:57, 18 October 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

Yes, it actually is quite common for things in a press release to be cut before the episode airs. The best known example is Harry Hamlin and Peter Wolf being listed as guest stars for Homerazzi. Look, per WP:CRYSTAL, just wait until the episode airs. That information is already on the page. Waiting two weeks before adding a cultural references section is not going to kill you (and if it is, then I suggest getting a new hobby). -- Scorpion^0422 23:59, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Niagara (The Office)

Please refrain from removing large chunks of text. Thanks. —Duncan^What I Do / _{What I Say} 23:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. My apologies. :-]. —Duncan^What I Do / _{What I Say} 23:22, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's OK :]NoD'ohnuts (talk) 23:23, 14 December 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

Bolditis

For the love of god, please stop bolding the current number of episodes as you did here. Boldface is to be used very sparingly, it's reserved exclusively for the article title and even then there are many exceptions where even the article title should not be repeated verbatim, let alone bolded. Bolding the current number of episodes is just entirely out of the question. --78.35.202.162 (talk) 01:02, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Other articles are generally a bad way of arguing (and if it were a valid argument at all, it would be in the MoS -- this particular case happens to be covered in the MoS and it explicitly advises against what you are doing). I've undone your MoS-violating revert, please leave it at that. --78.35.206.133 (talk) 07:59, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The Flu" to "Flu Season"

Thanks for making the move. Good catch, I didn't even realize the problem with the title. — Hunter Kahn 17:36, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh it's okNoD'ohnuts (talk) 17:56, 29 January 2011 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

Nielsen ratings

I keep telling you this and you keep ignoring me. Do not just copy and paste ratings information into articles. How are most readers supposed to understand something like "with a 2.8 rating/8% share among adults between the ages of 18 and 49"? It's a "with a 2.8 Nielsen rating and an 8% share of the audence among adults between the ages of 18 and 49." -- Scorpion^0422 03:50, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Earthquake GAN on hold

I have reviewed Earthquake (Modern Family) and placed the GAN on hold. Please address the issues raised on the review page and when you are finished, or if you have any questions, let me know on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A few issues have not been resolved and I added a few more. Let me know if you have any questions. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Our Children, Ourselves GA nom

I have reviewed and placed it on hold for seven days. Please take a look at my comments. Thanks, Ruby2010 talk 19:05, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Just writing to inform you I added further comments three days ago, so please respond to those. I'll put the article on hold for another four days while they get looked at. Thanks, Ruby2010 talk 15:43, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bixby's Back on hold

Hello, I have reviewed Bixby's Back for GA and placed the article on hold. Notes on how to improve the article can be found in it's talk page. Thanks. -- Matthew RD 22:36, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I have done everything on your list, you may recheck the article NoD'ohnuts (talk) 23:14, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Modern Family

The article Modern Family you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Modern Family for eventual comments about the article. Well done! GRAPPLE X 21:23, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Manny Get Your Gun

The article Manny Get Your Gun you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Manny Get Your Gun for things which need to be addressed. Not a major set of issues, but a few things needing addressed. GRAPPLE X 01:42, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Manny Get Your Gun

The article Manny Get Your Gun you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Manny Get Your Gun for eventual comments about the article. Well done! GRAPPLE X 00:20, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled

WP:Autopatrolled rights have been accorded to your account. Happy editing! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:58, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:24, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Halloween (Modern Family)/GA1

Hi NoD'ohnuts! I've made some suggestions on your article, have a look. Queenieacoustic (talk) 18:08, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of The Kiss (Modern Family)

Hello NoD'ohnuts, I've reviewed "The Kiss" (Modern Family) against the good article criteria and unfortunately the article does not meet those criteria at this time. I've left some comments at Talk:The Kiss (Modern Family)/GA1. Let me know if you have any questions. --BelovedFreak 15:26, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Family (season 2)

Hello there NoD'ohnuts, I noticed that you've offered up Modern Family (season 2) for Good article review. These sort of articles generally count as lists, should it not be put over at Featured List candidates rather than GA? That Ole Cheesy Dude ^(Talk to the hand!) 15:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, concerning this notice, we've discussed the matter over at Wikipedia talk:Featured lists#Concerning season-type articles and we've come to the conclusion that mainly if the season article has more prose than list then it should be Article and if it has more list than prose, then it should be FL. So you currently have a choice of which to go with. Thanks for your patience. That Ole Cheesy Dude ^(Talk to the hand!) 20:38, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the article goes under "good article" and not featured list NoD'ohnuts (talk) 20:55, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per our decision, I think the same. It's a good one by the way. That Ole Cheesy Dude ^(Talk to the hand!) 20:57, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Slow Down Your Neighbors review

Hi, just wanted to let you know I have reviewed Slow Down Your Neighbors and it is currently on hold. Sanders11 (talk) 16:11, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Nomination of Dwight K. Schrute, (Acting) Manager

Hi! I've reviewed Dwight K. Schrute, (Acting) Manager, which you posted at GAN a little while back. I've put the article on hold for the next seven days to allow for responses and fixes. The link to the review is here. Thanks! --Boycool (talk) 16:22, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article promotion

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Dwight K. Schrute, (Acting) Manager a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated. In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell ^(talk)

Business Guy GAN

I've made the edits I needed to do. Take a look! Railer-man (talk) 18:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Family (season 3)

Why we don't list these episodes with the confirm airdates? On other sites it is also made. -- Serienfan2010 (talk) 18:40, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh really where, if it is done on other articles on wikipedia then i could allow it on the third season page NoD'ohnuts (talk) 18:48, 3 September 2011 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

Your GA nomination of Halloween (Modern Family)

Hello NoD'ohnuts, I've reviewed Halloween (Modern Family) against the good article criteria and unfortunately the article does not meet those criteria at this time. I've left some comments at Talk:Halloween (Modern Family)/GA2. Let me know if you have any questions. --Ruby comment! 23:01, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Search Committee

The article Search Committee you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Search Committee for things which need to be addressed. Ruby comment! 03:43, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've left comments for the second review. You can find it here. Ruby comment! 17:08, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The List (The Office) on hold

please address the issues-SCB '92 (talk) 12:34, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

it's a pass-SCB '92 (talk) 20:43, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Garden Party (The Office) at GAN

Hey, NoD'ohnuts. I've reviewed the article, and have placed it on hold. You can access the article's review from here. Good work, and keep it up. :) --Starstriker7^(Talk) 06:51, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just two more things to wrap up, and I'll pass the article. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 03:58, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dude Ranch (Modern Family) at GAN

Hey! I have finished my review of "Dude Ranch". Sorry for the wait. I have put the article on hold for seven days for a few things to be addressed. Good luck! Basilisk4u (talk) 20:12, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Garage Sale (The Office) GAN

Hola, I have put your nomination on hold for seven . It is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes that should be done. See Talk:Garage Sale (The Office) for things which need to be addressed. —DAP388 (talk) 19:58, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Christmas Wishes (The Office) GAN

Hello, can you tell me why you deleted my "cultural references" addition to this episode? You state I didn't cite sources, but I don't see why I would need to. I brought up the fact that Toby's fictional character was the world's leading Egyptologist and one of James Spader's most famous roles was in fact playing an Egyptologist in the film Stargate. I just thought it would be an obvious connection. I have never really edited an article before and was hoping you could help me understand how to better contribute to wiki. I hope this is the right format and place for this. Thanks. pureskill Pureskill (talk) 06:23, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well Wikipedia requires you to put a source for a cultural reference from a reliable source in order to make it clear that it's not a coincidence and an actual cultural reference NoD'ohnuts (talk) 17:53, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dude Ranch (Modern Family)

Hey! I have passed the article. Congrats and keep up the good work! Basilisk4u (talk) 18:40, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Daniels

I'll see what I can find. Do you have any King of the Hill, Office or Parks and Rec DVDs? They may be useful. Gran^2 11:03, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I only have The Office season two and three and he only gives commentary on the second season NoD'ohnuts (talk) 17:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well I've had a look and I can't really find anything directly about him. That's what the article is missing - more directly relevant biographical information as opposed to just infomation about the shows. The KOTH stuff is the best stuff. The trouble is that much of this just doesn't exist. So, basically, I think the article is too short. It might pass, so if you want to nominate then go ahead. If you do, you need to format the references properly because many of them are inconsistent. Also a NoHomers poll is not a suitable source. Good luck. Gran^2 18:53, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Trilogy of Error

Hi! Do you just want me to give you advice on what to improve and stuff like that? Theleftorium ^(talk) 21:45, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, place. And if you had anything to add to the article I would be thankful. Also, do you know where I could find the ratings of the episode? NoD'ohnuts (talk) 21:48, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well the entire reception section needs to be rewritten for sure. For example, you write that "Robert Canning of IGN called the episode 'outstanding'", but you don't explain why he though it was outstanding. The grammar in the section is also quite bad. One sentence just reads "In AOL poll to determine the top 20 episodes of The Simpsons." You need to put some more effort into the article. See what I mean? Theleftorium ^(talk) 23:55, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yea I've noticed that. I just like to say that I edited this a LONG time ago when I first started using Wikipedia, so that's why it's very crummy NoD'ohnuts (talk) 23:58, 29 December 2011 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

IMO it needs much more work. The Production section reads like a list of bullet points and it doesn't flow well. The Cultural references section is really weak and should probably be incorporated into the production section. Theleftorium ^(talk) 16:33, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:The Office (U.S. TV series)/GA2

Hello NoD'ohnuts, I just reviewed a GA nomination of yours, The Office (U.S. TV series). The grammar is good, but much of the article is lacking citations, therefore I am allowing you up to two weeks to fix this problem. You can view my comments here: Talk:The Office (U.S. TV series)/GA2. Regards, --12george1 (talk) 00:13, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited New Year's Eve (Up All Night), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Jason Lee and Up All Night (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) 11:07, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Pilot (Smash), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Beautiful (song) and Michael Mayer (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) 11:50, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review for "New Year's Eve"

Hey there! I just reviewed "New Year's Eve," your submission for GA. You can view the results here. It's pretty good, just a few minor errors, and then I'll pass it.--Gen. Quon (talk) 19:38, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw something...

Are you from Olathe? I'm from Ottawa, KS, but I'm attending school in Lawrence. Just saw that and thought it was cool. :)--Gen. Quon (talk) 03:33, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why, yes I do. Such a lucky coincidence haha. :-) NoD'ohnuts (talk) 03:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Pilot (Smash), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Happy Birthday (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New New Year's Eve (Up All Night) article

		The Original Barnstar
		Thanks for improving Wikipedia with your creation of New Year's Eve (Up All Night). The article is now listed as a good article. Your efforts are appreciated. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:28, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RFC

Could you comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Television#Reformating_Emmy_Awards_episodic_Directing_and_Writing_templates.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:30, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Preschool Auction, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arrested Development (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:40, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA of After Hours

Hey, I just finished my GA of After Hours. There's only a few small issues. It's on hold right now. Cheers!--Gen. Quon (talk) 03:28, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Episode articles needed

Given your proclivity toward episode articles, I am calling your attention toward Wikipedia:TV-EPISODE#Important_articles_to_be_created.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:34, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compliment/Complement

Just a heads-up as I see you write this consistently wrong. Complement is not the same thing as compliment. Complement is an addition, compliment is praise.--Atlan (talk) 16:48, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, I didn't even notice I did that. Thanks for the heads up NoD'ohnuts (talk) 20:52, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Office GA

I put "Last Day in Florida" on hold. There's few issues that need to be sorted out before I will pass it.--Gen. Quon (talk) 01:01, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Pilot (Smash)

The article Pilot (Smash) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pilot (Smash) for comments about the article. Well done! There is a backlog of articles waiting for review, why not help out and review a nominated article yourself? Rawlangs (talk) 03:30, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Office GA

I just finished reviewing "Free Family Portrait Studio", but there are a few issues that need to be fixed. Cheers.--Gen. Quon (talk) 15:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Welcome Party

The article Welcome Party you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Welcome Party for things which need to be addressed. Statυs (talk) 03:39, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Office, Season 8

I have GA reviewed the The Office (U.S. season 8) article. TBrandley 23:55, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Annie Hall

Hello. Great to see another editor interested in getting our Annie Hall article up to scratch. You might find the process a little frustrating at times, but please stick with it. I had taken a break from the article, but if you are prepared to see it through (GA?) I'll work with you. The JPS^talk to me 18:48, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! :D That would be great if we could possibly make it a Good Article NoD'ohnuts (talk) 18:58, 20 July 2012 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

Good work last night. Could you do something about the phrase "...it was considered an "odd-pairing" for Willis and Allen..." -- namely, attributing who 'considered' it? A Peer or GA reviewer is bound to pick up on that. The JPS^talk to me 09:56, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Family

The Modern Family has turned into a huge miss since you last made edits to it. It has been delisted, see "International", no ref.s, and major cleanup is needed. TBrandley 20:32, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Office

Are you ready for the new season of The Office? I'm sort of excited to see if they can fix everything they broke...--Gen. Quon (Talk) 20:24, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have the same feelings as I do. I really don't like the sixth season, but I think since Greg is back, you're right, they can do it! So I'll give it a shot.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 20:56, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I believe so. I messed up last time, but we could set it straight again this time.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:56, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I got the rest of Season 8 ready for GA, and I've made pages for the first two episodes of Season 9, so we should be good to go. I can take the premiere if that's cool with you.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 21:12, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I'm kind of leery. I feel it could either be rather funny, or really, really bad. Dwight was always one of those characters who was hilarious, but only because Jim was so normal. If it's entirely a show based around Dwight starting fires in office buildings and Dwight sword fighting with his Nazi grandfather (which will happen, most likely), then it will probably be rather poopy (And Lieberstein is showrunning it... yikes). But I'll watch it, regardless. I'm just glad The Office is ending. I believe that Steve Carell will come back and it sounds like the show has a decent ending planned, unlike, say The X-Files or any other show that went on waaaaay too long.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 22:09, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, same here. Although OfficeTally claims there is going to be 24 episodes. here--Gen. Quon (Talk) 21:19, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just read this article. I take this as really good news that the final season will be excellent. Read this.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 20:03, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did see the promo. I think we're hopefully going to get some good, solid, season 2-esque drama. I'm sure they'll be fine in the end, but we need the characters to have stakes. Boy... I can't wait!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 21:20, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So.. what did you think of the episode?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 20:04, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, same here. I like how they toned down the zany a bit (although we still had Dwight on a bicycle on the roof) and went more for the storyarc angle. I feel really bad about the ratings, but at this point, I think only Steve Carell returning for the finale will boost them. I really can't wait to see what happens (what with Roy coming back and Steven Colbert in the Halloween episode).--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:10, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, NoD'ohnuts. You have new messages at Talk:Roy's Wedding/GA1.
Message added 17:51, 9 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TBrandley 17:51, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Annie Hall

Thanks a lot for your efforts on Annie Hall. I appreciate your interest in making the article as good as it can be. I hope you realize I share that goal. Although we may not agree on everything, I hope you are aware that I am sincerely trying to improve the article, and I realize you have the same interest. --Ring Cinema (talk) 01:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Boat (The Office) at GAN

I've reviewed the article and left comments. I'll give it another seven days to stay open. —Ed!^(talk) 12:26, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I have reviewed two more of your GA nominations: Training Day (The Office) and The Target (The Office). Will leave these open for another week to wait for your responses. —Ed!^(talk) 22:42, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The Office

Sorry I jumped in there and finished it. It was on my watch list, and it seemed like the reviewer was getting antsy. I didn't know if you were going to get to it, so I just jumped in there. Hope you don't mind, I don't mean to seem aggressive with my edits. I'm very excited for this last season!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 18:46, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry about all that. Take your time, I have no rush. ;) Yeah, I've been really pleased with this season. I feel like a lot of these episodes could fit really nicely into season 5. While they aren't up to the level of season 2 and 3, I'll take what I can get! I'm really happy that it appears Greg Daniels turned the sinking ship around. I think my favorite so far has been "The Target". That was, IMHO, a pretty solid episode.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:31, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Training Day" article

Were you planning on working on the "Training Day" article to get it to GA? I started to do a little clean-up, and noticed that you had added to it quite a bit in the last few weeks. If you want to edit it, I will steer clear, but I just thought I'd check. :)--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:05, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I might pop in and add a few things, like deleted scenes info, but other than that, it is yours!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:06, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Target (The Office), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oscar Martinez (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) 11:23, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Annie Hall

Edit warring has occurred again. I have locked the article for three days. If edit warring occurs again after the three days have expired I will consider closing the GA review as failed. SilkTork ^✔Tea time 13:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Office GAN's

I just noticed your Office articles you submitted for GAN are finished, they just haven't been literally "placed on hold". Just thought I'd share. :)--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:57, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I've reviewed two more of your GANs Suit Warehouse and Junior Salesman which need your feedback. Will leave open about another week. —Ed!^(talk) 16:06, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Suit Warehouse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Craig Robinson (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) 11:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Office stuff

OK, first off, what did you think of last night's episode (I personally really liked it). Second, next week, there are two episodes. I assume you want to do the first one, and I'll take the second. Or do you want to treat them both as an hour long? I don't really care; I assumed we'd do the first one, but I just thought I'd ask.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:30, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I thought, but I just wanted to check. The last few episodes have been iffy-to-good, but last nights was just awesome. It really reminded me of season two or three, and was probably hands down the best thing the show has produced since Michael left. I'm very, very excited to see what comes next.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:43, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'm just a conspiracy theorist, but I have a feeling he'll be back in some way. Maybe a phone call. That's all I really want.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:55, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Totally forgot to ask, but what did you think of "The Farm"? It definitely wasn't that great, but I will admit it was a lot better than I thought it would be. I think it's probably good NBC didn't pick the series up, though.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:01, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, strangely, I liked the farm stuff more than the office stuff. Todd Packer went from being the character who it is funny to hate to just the character that you hate. He just needs to get arrested.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:43, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The thing about Packer that's also frustrating is that he's had three sendoffs. That (pretty decent) episode in season seven, when he got fired in season eight, and now this episode. Maybe he'll die of an overdose.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 01:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the end is almost here. I for one think they have done an amazing job of tying this show up artfully, with the last two episodes being season (if not series) highlights. Gonna miss it!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:33, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Andy's stuff has all been non-starters. I plan on working on the other articles, yeah, but I don't really know where to jump in. I've wanted to promote season seven's page for a while, as well as the various episodes. I actually made this page to help me keep track. If you want to use it too, you are free to!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:22, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. For all intents and purposes, season 1-4 and 8-9 are done (or very nearly done). That just leaves 5, 6, and 7. Half of five is done, as is half of 7. If you want to work on the big episodes feel free! I'll probably just finished season 7, polish up the older GAs (they've gotten rusty) and work on the season articles. If we work hard enough, we might even be able to get all the season/episode articles ups to GA, which would only be the second time that had happened to a major franchise on Wikipedia (the fist was The X-Files).--Gen. Quon (Talk) 22:27, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, they really are. Maybe pick our favorites and just work on them? Usually, I think the articles are supposed to go "Production Info", "Character History", "Reception". Right now, they're all just long episode summaries.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno. I guess I'd say that we focus on the big ones, which would be Jim, Pam, Dwight, and Michael. I could take Dwight and Michael, if you want Pam and Jim (although we might want to split up the nice ones between us, so that you get Michael or Dwight, and I get one of the crappier ones too). Really, whatever works for you.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:06, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Couples Discount

I started the review for Couples Discount, and I'd like your thoughts on a few points. Overall this looks strong and close to ready for promotion--thanks to you and Gen Quon for your continuing work on these! What are you two going to do with yourselves after May 16? =) -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:04, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to bring Couples Discount to Good Article status. The thoroughness of your and Gen Quon's joint efforts on all things Office have been astonishing--keep up the good work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:29, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Office Stuff

OK, the finale is over. And it was awesome. I know it's your article, but I added a lot of stuff to it. Feel free to nominate it for GA, as I don't really mind. I think the season 9 article could easily become a GA, and then maybe an FL. Also, it looks like "Stairmageddon" is ready to be promoted after some minor fixes. Over and out.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:22, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! Just thought I should give the heads up. Yeah, the finale was amazing. Easily the best since Michael left. Speaking of which, Carell's cameo was pretty much the textbook definition of "perfect". Yeah, the finale will go down in history. Most big-name series have terrible finales (Seinfeld, Friends, The X-Files, Lost, etc.).--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:55, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. My schedule's a little crazy too, although I still have access to a computer. We'll see what we can do, though.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:07, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Annie Hall influence

I noticed that you removed She Wants Me. Perhaps like me you are a little bothered by that paragraph. It states as fact something that is minor or a matter of opinion. Do you agree it is a stretch or is that just me? --Ring Cinema (talk) 19:32, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Finale (The Office)

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Finale (The Office) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of H1nkles -- H1nkles (talk) 00:38, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Finale (The Office)

The article Finale (The Office) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Finale (The Office) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of H1nkles -- H1nkles (talk) 14:38, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Finale (The Office) GA review

Hello, I did the GA review and put it on hold pending answers to a couple concerns. One answer has been provided regarding the Twitter references, the other is a question about the reviews section and whether it is balanced with a fair look at negative reviews (which don't appear in the article). I would like to discuss this issue with you as the nominating editor at the GA Review page. Please advise if you are available at some point in the next week to have this conversation. If not then can you provide a date when you would be able to respond so that the GA Nom does not remain on hold indefinitely? Thank you. H1nkles (talk) _{citius altius fortius} 20:03, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Finale (The Office)

The article Finale (The Office) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Finale (The Office) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of H1nkles -- H1nkles (talk) 22:09, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Office (season 8) FL

Hey, just a heads up, The Office season 8 page just got promoted to Featured List. Since you were named as a co-nominator, you can display that you promoted this particular FL.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:16, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Annie Hall

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Annie Hall you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TonyTheTiger -- TonyTheTiger (talk) 08:01, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Annie Hall

The article Annie Hall you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Annie Hall for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TonyTheTiger -- TonyTheTiger (talk) 02:11, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if you activate your email address I'll make a suggestion to you.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:32, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Annie Hall

The article Annie Hall you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Annie Hall for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TonyTheTiger -- TonyTheTiger (talk) 07:31, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ring Cinema

Just thought you should know that your friend is the only one stopping Annie Hall from passing GA.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:42, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your work on Annie Hall and helping to promote it to GA while remaining patient with Ring Cinema as you did so. How you did it beats me!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:51, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weezer

Hey there, thanks for your work on Everything Will Be Alright in the End and "Back to the Shack". I would like to get "Back to the Shack" to GA status (which I would like to nominate too). But I'll let you nominate the album article if you choose to do so eventually. If not, maybe I'll eventually nominate that myself too. I've been wanting to get a Weezer song to GA status, and it looks like this will be a good one to do that on. Kokoro20 (talk) 14:33, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, continue helping on the "Back to the Shack" article if you would like, but you may notice me making some corrections to your edits. By the way, could you comment here [2]? The thread is about whether or not Death to False Metal should be considered a studio album. Kokoro20 (talk) 09:10, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Everything Will Be Alright in the End, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cleopatra (song). 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) 15:54, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Everything Will Be Alright in the End, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cleopatra (song). 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) 11:28, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:22, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for merging of Template:Modern Family episodes

Template:Modern Family episodes has been nominated for merging with Template:Modern Family. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Rob Sinden (talk) 16:47, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Weezer (2016 album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pinkerton. 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) 15:18, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 26 May

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Weezer (2016 album) page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 6 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Weezer (2016 album) page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, NoD'ohnuts. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, NoD'ohnuts. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of BB Good (song) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article BB Good (song) 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/BB Good (song) 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.

MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 22:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]