User talk:Stickeylabel

User	Talk	Contrib's	Awards	Email	WP AUTV

If you have any wikipedia related questions or comments, please leave me a message on my here. You can also contact me using the link above, or directly via e-mail. You can alternatively add stickeylabel@gmail.com to Windows Live Messenger for instant messenging.

Contents 1 Logos of networks 2 Channels 3 Network logos 4 Template:CVG Navigation 5 Thanks 6 ABC2 7 Tiny (Kong) 8 Prime Television Limited 9 Changing of the channel nine 10 Moving pages 11 Medal of Honor: Airborne 12 Australian television project 13 New stub types 14 Thanks for getting House unprotected 15 Unending 16 Image source 17 Talkpage header 18 Your edit to The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess

[edit] Logos of networks

What you should do is work out how to make a gallery in the wikimedia commons. All the logos should be stored on the commons anyway. Each of the articles which use one of the logos could refer to the commons gallery in the /*see also*/ section.Garrie 05:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Channels

Hey stickeylabel, great idea about the Ch10,7,9 articles - but should they be called something else? They do not refer to themselves like that on air. The separate articles will be important if multichannels are launched next year. ~ Trisreed my talk my contribs 06:39, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Trisreed. I was in doubt on what to call the new articles, I originally thought of eg. 'Seven (TV)' and 'Seven (Channel)', however I wasn't sure if they were appropriate. Any suggestions for other names would be gladly appreaciated.Stickeylabel 06:58, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I think 7 (television channel), 9 (television channel) and ten (television channel) should be used ~ Trisreed my talk my contribs 07:24, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that this division is really needed. Seven, for example, already had articles at Seven Network, Seven Media Group and Seven Network Limited. Wouldn't it be better to keep the content related to the channel at "Seven Network", and move the corporation information you want to split to one of the other articles? Tntnnbltn 16:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

It is not just the corporation history that was needed to be moved, but also all network based affilliation and network history. The channel that people watch as 'Seven' really is 'Channel Seven' broadcasted by the 'Seven Network' owned by 'Seven Media Group, which is half owned by 'Seven Network Limited'. And to keep all information on wikipedia accurate, I think it is best to have distinct articles for all networks, channels and corporations. Also when the Australian television networks begin HD multichanneling from next year, it would be far more beneficial to have distinct articles. Stickeylabel 23:14, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree, I like how it has been separated and it also allows reading the articles clearer as it isn't so cluttered with information about different parts of Seven's for example properties. - Mike Beckham 09:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Network logos

Please remove the network logos you have added to articles' infoboxes. Fair use images cannot be used like this as it violates fair use criterion eight. Thanks. J Di ^talk 02:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I appologise for violating fair use criterion eight, and it was completely unintentional. All network logos have been removed from articles that I previously added them to. Thanks. Stickeylabel 02:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:CVG Navigation

Could you please explain what was wrong or which templates broken with the Transition to Div/CSS.--Dispenser 21:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The issue I found with the Transition to Div/CSS was when running Internet Explorer 7.0 (See screenshot to the right), as the header of the navigation box is smaller in height and width, due to the increase in apparent cell spacing around the header. Also in the top section of the screenshot to the right, the text size of the body is noticeably smaller. I am not sure if this is an issue with Internet Explorer, as it may appear different under Firefox. I support a Div/CSS version of the infobox, only if the new version appears exactly as the normal/old version in all browsers. Thanks. Stickeylabel 00:17, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

You have done a really great job with all the TV logos you have been making, they are of top quality. You even got the WIN one perfect. --Whitehornmatt 00:16, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ABC2

My total first opinion is, it lacks independant references. There are no shortage of publications discussing television broadcasting in Australia. Every section in Programming could use totally different sources totally independant of both ABC and the governement. Without extensive independant referencing the article could only be a B-class article.

Note: preference should not be to use material from the ABC as a source. Extensive referal to primary sources and analysis of that material is original research.

For another tack try User:AndyZ/peerreviewer, a tool to do automatic peer-reviews.Garrie 02:17, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tiny (Kong)

Please change this article back to Tiny Kong. --PJ Pete

Is the characters real name Tiny or Tiny Kong? Stickeylabel 08:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Prime Television Limited

Umm, why is this article needed when we have Prime Television? Glen 09:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

There is a need for Prime Television Limited, as the old article contained programming, network, and corporate information in one article. The article was a mess, and needed to be sorted out. I have based the article structuring similar to other regional australian television networks, and added links to the corporation. The network page now contains the appropriate network infobox, rather than a company infobox. Thanks. Stickeylabel 09:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Changing of the channel nine

why did you change the channel nine programs from the listed view to paragraphs. it looks horrible and too compact. the list view was much easier to read until you changed it. its all in a mess now. if i was you i would change it back to how it looked before. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 149.167.221.138 (talk) 14:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC).

Firstly, please in future sign your comments. Secondly, if you want to view all of channel nine's programs in a list, you can just easily click on the link placed above the section, List of Nine Network programs. It is always best to minimise the use of lists where possible. Also, it is not a mess, it is grammatically and structurally correct. The paragraphs are condensed, to allow for readers to quickly view the highest rating television programs on Channel Nine, with the option of viewing all programs on a seperate page. Stickeylabel 22:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Moving pages

Hi Stickylabel. Please ensure when renaming articles that you use the move function and not simply a cut-and-paste method, as the latter fragments page histories (which are necessary for legal reasons). Also, when you do move a page, be sure to check what links to it (via What links here in the toolbox on the sidebar) and fix any double redirects. Thanks, --cj | talk 13:05, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Medal of Honor: Airborne

While it is true that Airborne won't be on the Wii, you were wrong in the reason. Epic Games have said the Wii COULD use Unreal Engine 3. Lrrr IV 01:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Please read Unreal engine#Unreal Engine 3. The Wii is incapable of Unreal Engine 3. Unreal Engine 3 was specifically designed for DirectX 9/10 PC's, the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3. There are no official or reputable unbiased resources that state otherwise. Please in future provide citable resources to back up your statements. Thanks. Stickeylabel 08:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Mark Reins said that UE3 could work on the Wii, it would just have to be modified. Lrrr IV 00:49, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Can you please link a resource to your statements? Preferrably something official. Thanks. Stickeylabel 05:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Australian television project

Hi Stickylabel. I was wondering whether you'd eventually set up an Australian television project - it's an area that will likely receive some benefit from one, and your knowledge of the topic naturally lends to driving the creation. However, might I suggest that you utilise the infrastructure of WikiProject Australia as much as possible. As a narrow project, it is better for Australian television to limit its maintenance responsibilities - specifically with regard to banner tagging and assessments. Having set up several projects, I'd be happy to help with this one.--cj | talk 11:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey Cyberjunkie, I totally agree with your comments, that we should ultilise the infrastructure of |WikiProject Australia as much as possible. I have made both Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian TV channels and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian TV shows. I have also made Template:Australian TV channels project and Template:Australian TV shows project. With reguards to banner tagging and assessments I have utilised something similar to Template:TelevisionWikiProject. With assessments should we use WikiProject Australia or Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian TV channels and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian TV shows? Also, it would be great to have your help with it all, so please contribute as much as you are able to. Thanks. Stickeylabel 11:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Here is an example of a converted article Talk:Home and Away, I understand that I should revert the WP:AUS template back, however should it also have WP:ATVS?Stickeylabel 11:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the best thing is to consolidate the two projects into a single WikiProject Australian television. I've already added a capability to {{WP Australia}} for such a project, and assessment capability should be available when we implement sub-projects assessments soon. If it's ok with you, I can make the necessary changes.--cj | talk 12:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

That's a good solution, to consolidate the two projects into a single project. I have created the page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Television, and will soon redirect the other two projects to that link. My initial model was very similar to that of the British television projects, however with less wikipedians and articles in Australia, two projects would be less useful. Stickeylabel 12:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

May I also add that WikiProject Australian television should also be linked to WikiProject Television and WikiProject Television Stations, as they are the worldwide WikiProjects.

Ok, as the consolidation is complete, I've disposed of the unnecessary pages. Good start with the tagging :)--cj | talk 14:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help :), tomorrow I will improve several stubs I have noticed during tagging, aiming for start quality. Also, is it at all possible to seperate "Channels/Networks" from "TV shows" on Category:WikiProject Australian television articles. Or do you think that it is fine as is? Stickeylabel 14:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Fine as is – it's not necessary.--cj | talk 15:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New stub types

Hi - two stub templatse or categories which you created has been nominated for deletion or renaming at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub types, which were not proposed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, do not meet the standard requirements for a stub type, either through being incorrectly named, ambiguously scoped, or through failure to meet standards relating to the current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding these stub types, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...wha? 23:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree that they should be deleted. I appologise for creating them, as at the time I was unable to find (Cat:Australia television stubs). I have added my comments at WP:SFD. Stickeylabel 23:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for getting House unprotected

Thanks for getting House unprotected; as a new user, I didn't know how cojoco 23:14, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unending

I have attempted, just like you, to draw attention that the comments about the episode are not suited there. However, I do no think removing my comments were prone to turning that talk page into a forum. It would have been nice to at least ask me when you removed them. I was severely rebuked for deleting other users' commnents even if they were off-topic (eg: "excellent episode") —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.32.1.82 (talk) 09:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

I appologise for not informing you, however your comments were unneccassary and useless, when the issue could've been resolved with a simple template (ie {{talkheader}}). The current issues you are having with other users is not my concern, and it would be appropriate instead to talk to the individuals involved. However, the issue is now resolved. Stickeylabel 09:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image source

Did you make Image:Aus tv.png? If so, please write it at the image page. I already replaced "GFDL" with "{{GFDL-self}}". Thanks in advance. --Ysangkok 21:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I have now added to Image:Aus tv.png that I created the image. Thanks. Stickeylabel 22:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talkpage header

Hi, I saw you created Template:TVEpisodeTalk‎. Do you really think we need this you think? It seems a bit over the top to me. We just can't start warning users for every single mistake they can possibly make on talkpages. I can see the value in the talk banner for the series, but using it on episode articles seems a bit too much. --TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 20:53, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess

Do not revert the picture. The consensu was reached months ago to use the Wii cover, one reason being that it is the main version (it released first on the Wii, and is the only version Nintendo really talks about). TJ Spyke 02:45, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

This is a Wikipedia talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at [1].